Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Bill -- There is master's degree called a Professional Science Masters (PSM) that is rapidly developing across the country. It is considered a terminal degree and is a combination of either several sciences or science and business. We have one at Fort Hays State University that includes both business and biology. I do not know what the job market is like for such degrees, but the forecast is high for such. mas EJF Elmer J. Finck Professor and Chair Department of Biological Sciences Fort Hays State University 600 Park Street Hays, KS 67601-4099 e-mail: efi...@fhsu.edu webpage: http://www.fhsu.edu/biology/finck.shtml phone: (785) 628-4214 fax: (785) 628-4153 home: (785) 625-9727 cell: (785) 650-1057 Let it be. The Beatles William Silvert cien...@silvert.org Sent by: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 03/14/2009 06:07 PM Please respond to William Silvert cien...@silvert.org To ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU cc Subject Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Since I did my graduate work in physics, not ecology, I was hesitant to step in here. However on looking at the various responses I would like to point out that in physics, and possibly in other areas, the masters degree is what you get if you try to get a PhD but drop out part way through. It is rare for someone to enter graduate school with the intent of getting a masters in physics, although there are some fields, such as optical physics, where it is a meaningful degree. In a sense the masters can be a terminal degree, although often this was not the original intent of the student. It may signify that the student did enough work in graduate student to merit some recognition, but was not willing or able to proceed to the PhD. However I should qualify this by pointing out that I know some schools that are trying to establish a graduate program and start with a masters degree before they are able to offer a PhD. This is fine, espeicially if they are conscientious about finding suitable jobs for masters graduates or providing help for those who want to go on to a graduate school that offers a PhD or EdD program. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: Sean McMahon sean...@duke.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:05 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Wait a second here. This has nothing to do with the debate over two terminal degrees (can't get more than a Ph.D. or Ed.D). A Masters is not a terminal degree.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
There is also something called an environmental MBA. Essentially, its an MBA with a series of graduate level environmental courses. ITs target job market is managing a company's footprint, while still being able to perform other business functions. The professional science masters (PSM) has been popping up at many schools and most of them are essentially non-thesis masters with a twist. I don't know about FHSU's program, but generally, I have never seen a job opening ask specifically for a PSM, but that does not mean it is not marketable. There are numerous articles on this degree in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Malcolm On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Elmer J. Finckefi...@fhsu.edu wrote: Bill -- There is master's degree called a Professional Science Masters (PSM) that is rapidly developing across the country. It is considered a terminal degree and is a combination of either several sciences or science and business. We have one at Fort Hays State University that includes both business and biology. I do not know what the job market is like for such degrees, but the forecast is high for such. mas EJF Elmer J. Finck Professor and Chair Department of Biological Sciences Fort Hays State University 600 Park Street Hays, KS 67601-4099 e-mail: efi...@fhsu.edu webpage: http://www.fhsu.edu/biology/finck.shtml phone: (785) 628-4214 fax: (785) 628-4153 home: (785) 625-9727 cell: (785) 650-1057 Let it be. The Beatles William Silvert cien...@silvert.org Sent by: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 03/14/2009 06:07 PM Please respond to William Silvert cien...@silvert.org To ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU cc Subject Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Since I did my graduate work in physics, not ecology, I was hesitant to step in here. However on looking at the various responses I would like to point out that in physics, and possibly in other areas, the masters degree is what you get if you try to get a PhD but drop out part way through. It is rare for someone to enter graduate school with the intent of getting a masters in physics, although there are some fields, such as optical physics, where it is a meaningful degree. In a sense the masters can be a terminal degree, although often this was not the original intent of the student. It may signify that the student did enough work in graduate student to merit some recognition, but was not willing or able to proceed to the PhD. However I should qualify this by pointing out that I know some schools that are trying to establish a graduate program and start with a masters degree before they are able to offer a PhD. This is fine, espeicially if they are conscientious about finding suitable jobs for masters graduates or providing help for those who want to go on to a graduate school that offers a PhD or EdD program. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: Sean McMahon sean...@duke.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:05 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Wait a second here. This has nothing to do with the debate over two terminal degrees (can't get more than a Ph.D. or Ed.D). A Masters is not a terminal degree. -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Managing Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology Texas AM University-Texarkana Fall Teaching Schedule: Vertebrate Biology - TR 10-11:40; General Ecology - MW 1-2:40pm; Forensic Science - W 6-9:40pm Office Hourse- TBA 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Education and Learning and Performance Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
This discussion reminds me of a discussion we had a few years ago about a BS and BA degree. It seems to me that they are indeed different, but equal and it amounts to what one wants in the end. In some ways it is six of one and half a dozen of another. Both are indeed good, but different. Here at FHSU, the EdD is valued in the College of Education, but not in the College of Arts and Science unless the program involves secondary education. A couple of weeks ago I heard an administrator say a law degree is equivalent to a doctorate. I wound if he meant a PhD or an EdD? mas tarde, EJF Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net Sent by: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 03/13/2009 04:35 PM Please respond to Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net To ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU cc Subject [ECOLOG-L] Education and Learning and Performance Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Honorable Forum: (Please Note: CAPITALIZATION is used in lieu of ITALICS, since the listserv does not support the latter. It is NOT intended as SHOUTING.) Any generalization contains a fraction of truth and a fraction of error. Absolutist positions can be taken by picking any fraction that aligns with any bias. At any level of specificity can be found a web of relevancies that are connected to other specifics and generalizations (It's turtles all the way down.) Such cherry-picking is a route to self-fulfilling prophesy in terms of a chosen absolute. The key concept is chosen. Intellectual exploration is necessarily, crucially, especially critically, open, open-ended. It is the chosen, the absolute, the certainty, the cast-in-concrete, that is the foundation of prejudice--a far different concept from discrimination, with which it is so frequently and ironically, incredibly confused. Either this distinction is crucial or it isn't. It that absolutism? Is there middle ground? With respect to the generalization that a Ph.D or an Ed.D is equal to, lesser than, or greater than the other is an endless argument. But they are DIFFERENT. Recognizing the difference, at any level, requires discrimination. A generalization on any of those possibilities is prejudice. For example, the phrase An Ed.D is a BS in makeup is a prejudiced statement. It is a rhetorical device to express a conclusion based on the author's experience, which is by definition (unless the author is a God) based on limits. One can throw out the baby with the bathwater, or devise almost any fallacy to fit the part of the statement that is in error, or one can use it as a catalyst for further exploration into relevant specifics--but that exercise also has its limits. Looking deeper into the question of Ph.D and Ed.D, one can further illuminate the relevant specifics through any number of ways. At one level, a comparison of the hours required to become certified, licensed, or sanctified is revealing. At another level, an examination of the courses required will reveal yet more detailed differences. Within that level, one can examine the courses, then the course content, the textbooks, their content, the way each course is taught, ad infinitum. One should, of course, always retain a suspension of judgment, but one can come to PROVISIONAL conclusions based on the evidence at hand, remaining open to new evidence and continuously revise one's provisional conclusions based on that evidence and discarding parts of the old evidence that are in error and reshuffle the relative relevance of the whole set of evidence upon which a revised, but still provisional conclusion is based. Both the Ed.D and the Ph.D are certifications that have their roots in the Guild system (yea, a Guild System on steroids). They are both, to some degree, a means of controlling (including and excluding) others. They both, to some degree and at some level, contain, or at least profess, some openness. Neither are a pure as the driven snow. Finally, at long last, we come to where the wheel meets the road--the student. It is probably that all people have different foci at different times, not to say abilities. Time was, not too long ago, when autistic people were considered uneducable. Whether or not that is a blessing in disguise is a matter for another discourse, but for better or for worse, there are now autistic people with Ph.D's who have distinguished themselves intellectually and academically. Still another is whether or not a degree, a grade, or other form of sanctification or their lack fosters or impedes PERFORMANCE. One can be taught the violin, for example, and perhaps one can earn a degree in violin, but almost anyone can distinguish the difference between whether or not one can play the violin, either according to the notes or beyond the notes, and which one performs in an exemplary fashion and which one is mediocre or deludes oneself of greatness whilst squawking most terribly
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
and higher than thou do view of EdDs. Matthew Voisine -Original Message- From: Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) [mailto:m.tup...@cgiar.org] 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
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:matthew.vois...@usace.army.mil] Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:49 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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:m.tup...@cgiar.org] 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Dave, Sorry, libel or even criticism of an EdD degree was not my intention. I realize that it certainly seems that way because I failed to provide the context for my frustration with the EdD degree. I do not feel that an EdD is an inferior degree, but the problem is that the general public, including many potential employers, do not see it as the equivalent of a PhD. The Wikipedia EdD page cites a couple of studies that suggest there is no difference in the quality or quantity of work involved in EdD or PhD degrees. That page also suggests that the EdD might be particularly useful in preparing students for consultancy work. Unfortunately, the majority of employers in aquatic science do not appear to feel the same. I actually was going to enroll in an EdD program back in the 90's but backed out after I saw several of my friends who earned EdDs repeatedly get turned down for jobs that went to PhDs (see my other email). At the time I was interested in combining fisheries research and extension, but as soon as I said the word research, prospective supervisors or employers wanted to see a PhD. I'm not sure how universities can educate the general public, and particularly the science sector, about the relative roles and values of an EdD and a PhD. Until they can, people who want a job in science will (in general) be better off getting a PhD if they want to maximize their chances of getting a position. I apologize to the list for a knee-jerk reaction caused by a bad experience from my past, but I wonder if the prospects for finding employment with an EdD (other than in specialized positions that would really suit the EdD) have improved much in the last 15 years. Cheers, Mark -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of David M. Lawrence Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 10:39 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD It's nice to see the enlightened opinion here -- i.e., tripe -- but until someone comes up with a substantive difference between the two types of degrees, all I can conclude is that the critics of Ph.D.s are bigoted jerks better suited to wearing white sheets and burning crosses than scientists who dispassionately pursue the evidence no matter where it leads. Put up, or shut up. Comments like Tupper's and Tyson's, given that they are in print, amount to libel of anyone with an Ed.D. If you're going to criticize it in such terms, you better have evidence to back your statement up. So, what is it? Dave Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
This question was absolutely legitimate, and I would like to personally apologize to Jay for the disgraceful level of professionalism exhibited by some of the respondents. To say that I was disappointed in some of the comments is an understatement. EdD or PhD, this thread has certainly proven that there are some very basic levels of intelligence that even the most pompous intellectual blowhard (perhaps more than most) doesn't quite grasp. There are a number of people that attach a little too much self-importance to the piece of paper that hangs on their wall, and in a meritocracy, such as we claim to be, the only measure of worth in this life is what you DO. There are plenty of PhD's out there that have produced nothing but derivative garbage from day one. And there are plenty of college dropouts that have changed the world. Lest we forget that a 3rd rate patent clerk revolutionized modern science while the world's greatest PhD's wet themselves, it seems that we could all use a good dose of humility. PhD or EdD? The response to the question was very simple. What do you want to do? The two degrees are very different, not superior or inferior, and qualify you for different professions. There have been a few posts that have illustrated these differences quite nicely. The rest have me blinking in disbelief, and I would only encourage Jay to give us another chance if he has another question sometime, because this time we let him (and ourselves) down. D. Muth University of Virginia Environmental Sciences On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:56 PM, David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.com wrote: What??? The person who started this thread asked a legitimate question -- the kind of question this listserv is for, i.e., to seek advice on some professional matter from peers. The trolls came later. Dave =?iso-8859-1?Q?MTS?= wrote: Wow. This thread is sort of reminding me of the whole science vs. creationism topic that appeared on the Entomology listserv out of UGuelph. While this thread is certainly entertaining I question the intent of the original poster and will put forth the possibility of an internet troll looking to cause trouble. Honestly, it's so easy to touch a nerve in cyberspace especially when you can do it fairly anonymously. To pit one profession against another, particularly in this case since there has always been tension on this topic, just reeks of trolling IMO. Not to mention if the original poster was really making this big of decision..where is he now and why is he asking for life altering information on an internet listserv? I mean, come on this guy presumably has a whole university at his finger tips and should, at least by this point, have enough personal experience and self motivation to figure this out. It's not like the two fields in question are so similar that you'd really need know the minute differences to make the best decision, in fact, these two fields are so very different in fundimentals and in duties that it shouldn't so hard you have to ask a bunch of strangers what's right. So far the only response from him was a list of things that could add fuel to the fire. Maybe I'm just overly suspisous but it's not the first time something like this has happened on a professional science board and it wouldn't be the last. Heck, I've seen email scams on listserv's. Anyway, since everyone is spouting that is what I have to say. -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
All, I write to correct the misleading comments about Mendel in the post below. The idea of Mendel as an amateur savant without connection to the leading-edge science of this day has been debunked for a decade and should be laid to rest. Please read: Gregor Mendel and the Laws of Evolution, History of Science, Volume 37, Part 2, Number 116, June 1999: 217-235. Which can be downloaded at the this url: www.shpltd.co.uk/gliboff-gregor-mendel.pdf He was a student of Franz Unger, a pioneer in biogeography and a member of a rich set of fellow scientists Phil Ganter Biology Department Tennessee State University From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Winterstein [bigdoobs...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 10:29 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD By now this thread may be getting a little old and I hope I'm not beating a dead horse. But I just would like to point out that a piece of paper does not equal intelligence. I do agree with earlier folks that pointed out that drive and determination are 90% of a PhD with 10% being intelligence. There are plenty of geniuses out there driving cabs and flipping burgers. Have you ever been to a mensa meeting? I think a degree these days means a much different thing than it did 50 years ago. It used to be a big accomplishment to obtain a bachelors degree much less a PhD (so my father tells me). My father worked for the USGS as a hydrologist for over thirty years and started entry level with a bachelors in civil engineering. He worked through the years and moved up in position until he ceased doing field work and was only running analyses and writing reports. To achieve his grade at the time he retired one would need a PhD to qualify. We're in an age where motivation and a yearning to learn aren't enough. It seems now we need to be qualified by institutions and recieve a piece of paper to prove to the world we are intelligent or perhaps just competent enough to to contribute to a field of science. The funny thing nowadays is when a person follows their personal passion for a subject they haven't been trained in or recieved a degree in and they're called an amateur scientist. By these standards so would've Gregor Mendel. We must be careful to hold on to titles so dearly and remember to check our arrogance at the door. Mark Winterstein
[ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD simplified
PhD in science: most of these teach, and conduct research in, science in a science department at an institution of higher learning. EdD in science (education): most of these teach, and conduct research in, pedagogy of science in an education department at an institution of higher learning. Many of these show up in school administration positions, too. If you are mostly into doing biology, get the PhD. If you are mainly interested in pedagogy, go for the EdD. No? Interestingly, neither of these is focused on teaching YOU to be a good teacher. Historically, professors aren't expected to be teachers in the way that high-school teachers are. That's why they're called professors - all they ever used to do was profess (to/at the students). Joe
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Since I did my graduate work in physics, not ecology, I was hesitant to step in here. However on looking at the various responses I would like to point out that in physics, and possibly in other areas, the masters degree is what you get if you try to get a PhD but drop out part way through. It is rare for someone to enter graduate school with the intent of getting a masters in physics, although there are some fields, such as optical physics, where it is a meaningful degree. In a sense the masters can be a terminal degree, although often this was not the original intent of the student. It may signify that the student did enough work in graduate student to merit some recognition, but was not willing or able to proceed to the PhD. However I should qualify this by pointing out that I know some schools that are trying to establish a graduate program and start with a masters degree before they are able to offer a PhD. This is fine, espeicially if they are conscientious about finding suitable jobs for masters graduates or providing help for those who want to go on to a graduate school that offers a PhD or EdD program. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: Sean McMahon sean...@duke.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:05 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Wait a second here. This has nothing to do with the debate over two terminal degrees (can't get more than a Ph.D. or Ed.D). A Masters is not a terminal degree.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
If you are a student who has taken an Ed.D. program, and that program's requirements are clearly equivalent to a Ph.D. in Biology, I recommend that you ask the program director of the Ed.D. program to write you a note of clarification to enclose with your application materials to positions. When you enclose that note you want to reference it clearly in your introductory letter. Your advisor should also indicate this in his/her letter of reference. Additionally, you might ask an outside professor who has experience to review your dissertation and provide you with an evaluation indicating if it is equivalent to what is typically done in their program. In this way, you could more authoritatively defend in employment applications that you in fact have completed work equivalent to a Ph.D. This will not guarantee that search committees will consider this information, but it certainly puts you in a more competitive situation. I hope that this is constructive feedback, rather than the long series of mixed feedback which has previously been posted. On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) m.tup...@cgiar.org wrote: Dave, Sorry, libel or even criticism of an EdD degree was not my intention. I realize that it certainly seems that way because I failed to provide the context for my frustration with the EdD degree. I do not feel that an EdD is an inferior degree, but the problem is that the general public, including many potential employers, do not see it as the equivalent of a PhD. The Wikipedia EdD page cites a couple of studies that suggest there is no difference in the quality or quantity of work involved in EdD or PhD degrees. That page also suggests that the EdD might be particularly useful in preparing students for consultancy work. Unfortunately, the majority of employers in aquatic science do not appear to feel the same. I actually was going to enroll in an EdD program back in the 90's but backed out after I saw several of my friends who earned EdDs repeatedly get turned down for jobs that went to PhDs (see my other email). At the time I was interested in combining fisheries research and extension, but as soon as I said the word research, prospective supervisors or employers wanted to see a PhD. I'm not sure how universities can educate the general public, and particularly the science sector, about the relative roles and values of an EdD and a PhD. Until they can, people who want a job in science will (in general) be better off getting a PhD if they want to maximize their chances of getting a position. I apologize to the list for a knee-jerk reaction caused by a bad experience from my past, but I wonder if the prospects for finding employment with an EdD (other than in specialized positions that would really suit the EdD) have improved much in the last 15 years. Cheers, Mark -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of David M. Lawrence Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 10:39 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD It's nice to see the enlightened opinion here -- i.e., tripe -- but until someone comes up with a substantive difference between the two types of degrees, all I can conclude is that the critics of Ph.D.s are bigoted jerks better suited to wearing white sheets and burning crosses than scientists who dispassionately pursue the evidence no matter where it leads. Put up, or shut up. Comments like Tupper's and Tyson's, given that they are in print, amount to libel of anyone with an Ed.D. If you're going to criticize it in such terms, you better have evidence to back your statement up. So, what is it? Dave Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Mitch, your opening paragraph and premise just doesn't site right with me. From my observations of the folks I've seen get PhDs, I have a hard time accepting that a PhD is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving due to any inherent intellectual prowess- that statement absolutely smacks of the elitism that gives academics a bad name. It comes off as putting yourself on some pedestal of intelligence due to a piece of paper you received. A PhD is definitely something that the majority of the population does not aspire to achieve. PhD programs obviously attract some of the best and brightest since they are the capstone degrees in most fields- but plenty of average folks receive PhDs too. I have seen very few cases where a PhD is denied to a candidate due to intellectual inferiority. I would suggest that the most important ingredient in achieving a PhD is determination, not inherent intelligence. Andrew Bailey Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Wow. This thread is sort of reminding me of the whole science vs. creationism topic that appeared on the Entomology listserv out of UGuelph. While this thread is certainly entertaining I question the intent of the original poster and will put forth the possibility of an internet troll looking to cause trouble. Honestly, it's so easy to touch a nerve in cyberspace especially when you can do it fairly anonymously. To pit one profession against another, particularly in this case since there has always been tension on this topic, just reeks of trolling IMO. Not to mention if the original poster was really making this big of decision..where is he now and why is he asking for life altering information on an internet listserv? I mean, come on this guy presumably has a whole university at his finger tips and should, at least by this point, have enough personal experience and self motivation to figure this out. It's not like the two fields in question are so similar that you'd really need know the minute differences to make the best decision, in fact, these two fields are so very different in fundimentals and in duties that it shouldn't so hard you have to ask a bunch of strangers what's right. So far the only response from him was a list of things that could add fuel to the fire. Maybe I'm just overly suspisous but it's not the first time something like this has happened on a professional science board and it wouldn't be the last. Heck, I've seen email scams on listserv's. Anyway, since everyone is spouting that is what I have to say.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Just as a note... The biggest problem in my education (B.S.) was not the lack of knowledge in my professors but the lack of understanding in how to convey their brilliance. The professors who understood how to pass on their knowledge in an engaging and effective manor were the ones high on my list for classes (if I had a choice). Christy A teacher who is attempting to teach without inspiring the pupil with a desire to learn is hammering on a cold iron. - Horace Mann 'It must be remembered that the purpose of education is not to fill the minds of students with facts... it is to teach them to think, if that is possible, and always to think for themselves.' -Robert Hutchins Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:06:27 -0400 From: aroad...@vt.edu Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Fellow Ecologers: I enjoy reading the debates that occur on this listserv and am content to keep my opinion to myself, however, in response to this most recent discussion (or should I say mudslinging) about the differences between a PhD and an EdD I feel compelled to express my concerns. I am not well versed in the qualities, pros, cons, frustrations, rewards, opportunities or detriments of these two degrees, but the condescending comments sent across the listserv with respect to the EdD are disheartening. They are two styles of degree with different methods and possibly different results. In certain cases, the earning of a PhD may open more doors for a person towards their specific goals, while in others the EdD may be more appropriate. My concern here is not which degree is more fitting for any specific individual, my concern is the bigoted opinions expressed. As scientists shouldn't we keep open minds about the world we live and work in? Isn't any form of higher education better than none? While in certain opinions a PhD is superior to an EdD, that shouldn't mean that an EdD is a waste of time and energy, it's just not your choice. To badmouth a practice available for furthering knowledge and understanding of any field is something that I see as impolite and intolerant. Any discussion had, journal article read, class taken or degree earned is a way that an individual has expanded their experiences and broadened their views and I cannot believe that any of it would be a waste of time or should be viewed as unworthy of the attentions of colleagues and peers. Education is what moves society forward. Please forgive me if I have spoken out of turn or offended. Sincerely, Adrian Roadman On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) m.tup...@cgiar.org wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
I couldn't help but add a little fuel to this fireI completely agree with Dave's assertion that many of the negative, arrogant and rude comments regarding the merits of an Ed.D. are based more on ignorance and a superiority complex than on any real knowledge of the degree itself. I actually have experience with the Ed.D., as a former boss of mine was in the midst of completing an Ed.D. while I was working for him. I can tell you that his degree requirements were no softer than those of many of the Ph.D. programs in ecology, whether that be focused on modelling, genetics, field-based ecology or human dimensions. I just asked a colleague in my lab if she had any experience with the Ed.D. degree program; right away, she recounted a family friend who had his Ed.D.--and was a regional extension director for the state of North Carolina, working as faculty from North Carolina State University. I don't see why the different concentration of the Ed.D.--(scientific) education and outreach, which we would presumably all agree are huge necessities in our field--somehow makes it less worthy than the Ph.D.'s focus. The insistence that only a privileged few are bright enough and tenacious enough to achieve a Ph.D., while ANYBODY could earn a Ed.D. is ridiculous; the differences in degree concentrations does not mean different levels of rigor. We all have different professional goals, and these goals require different pathways to get there. When so much of the discussion on this listserve surrounds the issue of how do we get people with different backgrounds to work together to achieve a common goal?, I think it would do a lot of folks some good to check their egos at the door, and recognize that we'll never effectively work together if there is always an air of intellectual or professional superiority maintained by some. It's no wonder agency folks, consultants and the like can't stand academics; we bring it on ourselves. Remember, everyone who is at the table is there for a reason--because they ALL belong there. If some of you would stop preening your feathers, you might listen to one of your lesser colleagues and actually learn something. Lauren Quoting David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.com: An Ed.D. does the same thing -- just in a different field. It may be solely applied research as opposed to basic research, but a lot of people get Ph.D. degrees in applied fields and no one seems to sneer at their worth. So, a Ph.D. dissertation that reveals how to improve yield of a pine plantation under changing environmental conditions is worthy of our respect, but a Ed.D. dissertation that reveals how the improve yield (in terms of concept learning and retention) among high school science students coming from disadvantaged backgrounds is not. Can you defend that distinction? Dave Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. In science, this amounts to the demonstration of the ability to conduct an original research program - to advance the field through a series of interrelated research projects; to interpret the results and provide evidentiary basis for the novelty and relevance of the contribution in the context of the existing primary literature. If my understanding of the EdD is correct, it is primarily pedagogical in focus- it demonstrates an ability to provide a simplified, but basically accurate explanation of a complex system that is understandable for an audience of a specific education level. PhD's advance the field while EdD's may explain what the philosophers did. Any PhD who conducts a research program that includes the training graduate students, and/or engages in teaching at the undergraduate level also does the work of an EdD- we get the best of both worlds. Mitch Cruzan 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 Jay Beugly wrote: 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. Andrew D. Bailey wrote: Mitch, your opening paragraph and premise just doesn't site right with me. From my observations of the folks I've seen get PhDs, I have a hard time accepting that a PhD is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving due to any inherent intellectual prowess- that statement absolutely smacks of the elitism that gives academics a bad name. It comes off as putting yourself on some pedestal of intelligence due to a piece of paper you received. A PhD is definitely something that the majority of the population does not aspire to achieve. PhD programs obviously attract some of the best and brightest since they are the capstone degrees in most fields- but plenty of average folks receive PhDs too. I have seen very few cases where a PhD is denied to a candidate due to intellectual inferiority. I would suggest that the most important ingredient in achieving a PhD is determination, not inherent intelligence. Andrew Bailey Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. -- Mitchell B. Cruzan, Associate Professor Department of Biology P.O. Box 751 Portland State University Portland, OR 97207 http://web.pdx.edu/~cruzan/
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
I would argue that getting a Ph.D. is 90% working hard and meeting deadlines and 10% how smart you are relative to the other Ph.D. students. But, you wouldn't be in the program in the first place if you didn't prove a certain level of intelligence...this goes for all graduate programs. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Andrew D. Bailey andrew.bai...@ncmail.net wrote: Mitch, your opening paragraph and premise just doesn't site right with me. From my observations of the folks I've seen get PhDs, I have a hard time accepting that a PhD is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving due to any inherent intellectual prowess- that statement absolutely smacks of the elitism that gives academics a bad name. It comes off as putting yourself on some pedestal of intelligence due to a piece of paper you received. A PhD is definitely something that the majority of the population does not aspire to achieve. PhD programs obviously attract some of the best and brightest since they are the capstone degrees in most fields- but plenty of average folks receive PhDs too. I have seen very few cases where a PhD is denied to a candidate due to intellectual inferiority. I would suggest that the most important ingredient in achieving a PhD is determination, not inherent intelligence. Andrew Bailey Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Interesting. When I went to college I went there to learn, not to be taught. In fact, I often ended up spending much to much time learning tangents to what the focus of the actual course was, because that was what interested me. It took me a while to realize that it isn't what you know, but how much of what was presented in class you know! I can recall taking computer-tested multiple choice tests that were crafted with the expectation that the student's knowledge was limited to that course. this was very hard for me, because I was there to learn, not be taught. I went to the library and took out books to read more on subjects that had been glanced over in class. Ultimately, my own performance was stifled because I read about the 42 billion exceptions to a generalized rule that only had use as a teaching tool for developing a basic understanding. In my case I would much rather take a college course from a professor who placed the burden of learning on me and was the world's expert on what they were teaching. Why? because I came to school to learn, not to be taught. I can always go to his/her office hours or make an appointment to get help. At least that was my view as a freshman and it continues to be my view now. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:52 AM, christy white fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com wrote: Just as a note... The biggest problem in my education (B.S.) was not the lack of knowledge in my professors but the lack of understanding in how to convey their brilliance. The professors who understood how to pass on their knowledge in an engaging and effective manor were the ones high on my list for classes (if I had a choice). Christy A teacher who is attempting to teach without inspiring the pupil with a desire to learn is hammering on a cold iron. - Horace Mann 'It must be remembered that the purpose of education is not to fill the minds of students with facts... it is to teach them to think, if that is possible, and always to think for themselves.' -Robert Hutchins Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:06:27 -0400 From: aroad...@vt.edu Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Fellow Ecologers: I enjoy reading the debates that occur on this listserv and am content to keep my opinion to myself, however, in response to this most recent discussion (or should I say mudslinging) about the differences between a PhD and an EdD I feel compelled to express my concerns. I am not well versed in the qualities, pros, cons, frustrations, rewards, opportunities or detriments of these two degrees, but the condescending comments sent across the listserv with respect to the EdD are disheartening. They are two styles of degree with different methods and possibly different results. In certain cases, the earning of a PhD may open more doors for a person towards their specific goals, while in others the EdD may be more appropriate. My concern here is not which degree is more fitting for any specific individual, my concern is the bigoted opinions expressed. As scientists shouldn't we keep open minds about the world we live and work in? Isn't any form of higher education better than none? While in certain opinions a PhD is superior to an EdD, that shouldn't mean that an EdD is a waste of time and energy, it's just not your choice. To badmouth a practice available for furthering knowledge and understanding of any field is something that I see as impolite and intolerant. Any discussion had, journal article read, class taken or degree earned is a way that an individual has expanded their experiences and broadened their views and I cannot believe that any of it would be a waste of time or should be viewed as unworthy of the attentions of colleagues and peers. Education is what moves society forward. Please forgive me if I have spoken out of turn or offended. Sincerely, Adrian Roadman On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) m.tup...@cgiar.org wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
to knowledge. (Graduate Faculty Action, February 15, 1973). The dissertation usually requires a year or more of study. Registration in dissertation research hours for on-campus students, or by petition, in absentia after the completion of the required 64 hours beyond the master’s degree is optional. This registration typically comes after the course work is completed and before the time limits are reached. The College of Education does not limit the number of dissertation research hours a student can take, however, no more than 32 hours can be counted toward the Ph.D. and at least 4 hours is expected. Ph.D. in natural resources and environmental sciences 64 hrs beyond the masters 32 hrs or more of courses 32 hrs or more of dissertation research must pass preliminary examination prior to candidacy for Ph.D. Must pass final defense. This is all they had on the Ph.D. in NRES. However, this degree frequently requires in excess of three-four years spent doing research, and virtually all graduates take more than four years to complete the degree. Ed. D.'s can take as little as a few years of fulltime study to complete. The point is, the issue that an Ed.D. is not qualified to teach as a biology professor has nothing to do with insult or perception. The degree simply is not intended, in most cases, even to be a teaching degree but rather a professional degree for those seeking principal and superintendant jobs. The Ph.D. in education is a degree for those interested in studying the field of education (and teaching about it), and the Ph.D. in and science is a degree for those interested in studying that science, and teaching about it. The degrees have very little to do with each other, focus on completely different career goals, and overlap little. It is no different to say an Ed. D. is not qualified to be a biology professor than it is to say a Ph.D. is not qualified to drill teeth. A typical Ph.D. is not a dentist, a typical Ed.D. is not a research biologist, and a typical Ph.D. in education generally is not seeking a post as a principal. Maybe this will clear this mess up that is obviously getting a little twisted and causing grief! On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.com wrote: It's nice to see the enlightened opinion here -- i.e., tripe -- but until someone comes up with a substantive difference between the two types of degrees, all I can conclude is that the critics of Ph.D.s are bigoted jerks better suited to wearing white sheets and burning crosses than scientists who dispassionately pursue the evidence no matter where it leads. Put up, or shut up. Comments like Tupper's and Tyson's, given that they are in print, amount to libel of anyone with an Ed.D. If you're going to criticize it in such terms, you better have evidence to back your statement up. So, what is it? Dave Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- -- David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
If there is no difference between a Ph.D. and an Ed.D. why does almost every major university in the nation, barring Harvard, offer both degrees? On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Mitch Cruzan cru...@pdx.edu wrote: Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. Andrew D. Bailey wrote: Mitch, your opening paragraph and premise just doesn't site right with me. From my observations of the folks I've seen get PhDs, I have a hard time accepting that a PhD is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving due to any inherent intellectual prowess- that statement absolutely smacks of the elitism that gives academics a bad name. It comes off as putting yourself on some pedestal of intelligence due to a piece of paper you received. A PhD is definitely something that the majority of the population does not aspire to achieve. PhD programs obviously attract some of the best and brightest since they are the capstone degrees in most fields- but plenty of average folks receive PhDs too. I have seen very few cases where a PhD is denied to a candidate due to intellectual inferiority. I would suggest that the most important ingredient in achieving a PhD is determination, not inherent intelligence. Andrew Bailey Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. -- Mitchell B. Cruzan, Associate Professor Department of Biology P.O. Box 751 Portland State University Portland, OR 97207 http://web.pdx.edu/~cruzan/ -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
In an attempt to reduce the amount of useless information that I posted I had only provided the information that I thought was necessary for my question to be answered accurately. However, given how this has spiraled into a huge debate with me being a fictitious troll I guess I will inform the readers of Ecolog about my life story. I finished my MS at Ball State last spring. At that time Ball State was working towards converting their EdD program to a PhD program. I enjoyed working with my advisor so I decide to remain at Ball State as an EdD student with the intentions of switching to a PhD when it started. The economy then continued to decline and so did the likelihood of the PhD program becoming a reality. Now here I am a year in on a 4yr EdD program. A program that unlike many of the other EdD programs described allows me to purse research in any direction I want (looking at factors influencing large river cyprinid communities, no research in education). So I posted a question to Ecolog subscribers, because I thought who better to ask than future colleges. I intend to publish, in fact I am coauthor on a couple of published papers and lead author on a paper in the revision stages. Based on the response that I have received it seems that for many subscribers I could publish in ecology twice a year and still be unemployable at a research institution. At this stage in the game I would love to end up working at a university that had a MS program. Stream ecology is my passion and I enjoy research more than teaching, but I thought I may be able to do both with an EdD. I apologize for filling subscribers with numerous emails on a topic that I only expected a handful of responses. I want to thank everyone who has sent me an emails personally (dozens of people). In the future I will and abstain from asking controversial questions (didn't realize this was one). If any one wishes to know more about my situation, please ask. I look forward to seeing many of you this weekend at Early Career Scientist Symposium: Using Phylogenies in Ecology conference at U of M. Jay Beugly Current EdD student Ball State University
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
If I can add to this clutter, qualities of phDs are vastly different among universities. Through my carrier, I have encountered many phDs and advised phD graduate students. Reviewing their manuscripts, research and dissertation projects, I sometimes wonder how they were able to receive phD and also question quality of their professors giving them phD. I can certainly say that MS students of my Alma Mater are definitely better than some phDs I encountered. Toshihide Hamachan Hamazaki, phD : 濱崎俊秀：浜ちゃん Alaska Department of Fish Game Division of Commercial Fisheries 333 Raspberry Rd. Anchorage, Alaska 99518 Ph: 907-267-2158 Fax: 907-267-2442 Cell: 907-440-9934 E-mail: toshihide.hamaz...@alaska.gov
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
What??? The person who started this thread asked a legitimate question -- the kind of question this listserv is for, i.e., to seek advice on some professional matter from peers. The trolls came later. Dave =?iso-8859-1?Q?MTS?= wrote: Wow. This thread is sort of reminding me of the whole science vs. creationism topic that appeared on the Entomology listserv out of UGuelph. While this thread is certainly entertaining I question the intent of the original poster and will put forth the possibility of an internet troll looking to cause trouble. Honestly, it's so easy to touch a nerve in cyberspace especially when you can do it fairly anonymously. To pit one profession against another, particularly in this case since there has always been tension on this topic, just reeks of trolling IMO. Not to mention if the original poster was really making this big of decision..where is he now and why is he asking for life altering information on an internet listserv? I mean, come on this guy presumably has a whole university at his finger tips and should, at least by this point, have enough personal experience and self motivation to figure this out. It's not like the two fields in question are so similar that you'd really need know the minute differences to make the best decision, in fact, these two fields are so very different in fundimentals and in duties that it shouldn't so hard you have to ask a bunch of strangers what's right. So far the only response from him was a list of things that could add fuel to the fire. Maybe I'm just overly suspisous but it's not the first time something like this has happened on a professional science board and it wouldn't be the last. Heck, I've seen email scams on listserv's. Anyway, since everyone is spouting that is what I have to say. -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Wow, I hope that Jay is kidding. It's only the good debates that really make lists exciting. Not all of us subscribe just for the job ads. One point that came up in several postings was the idea that some employers are prejudiced towards the PhD and that it carries more weight than it should. Also a complaint that not all PhDs are of comparable quality. No doubt about that. Nor is it unreasonable -- should those of us who want to pursue scientific careers be shut out just because we can't get into Harvard or MIT or Princeton? Still, the PhD is based on in-depth research into a field, and it is natural that if an employer wants to hire people to carry out in-depth research into a field, they are likely to prefer PhDs. Still, even formal systems can turn out to be flexible. I used to work for the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans where those of us with PhDs were classified as Professionals and were slotted into five niches for Research Scientists while those without were called Technicians and had totally different kinds of contracts (not necessarily bad, since they got overtime and we didn't, which really sucked when we were doing 24-hour stations at sea!). But somehow the good techs made it quite far, and several occupy positions just as important and influential as any PhD, including major international posts. In some countries the PhD takes a long time to finish and may be awarded well into one's career -- my wife was head of the Division of Oceanography at her institute long before she got around to finishing her PhD. I suppose the underlying issue is not which degree is better in some sese, but which one involves the kind of education that prospective employers are looking for. It is unfortunately true that not all universities place as much emphasis on teaching ability as they should, although this is not always the case -- when I was looking for jobs early in my career I applied to some four-year colleges and was rejected because they thought my research record was too good and this cast doubt on my commitment to teaching! The only real option is to pursue one's goals with a measure of pragmatism. A lot of people have had to adjust their plans, such as their intended research and teaching ideas, in the face of limited opportunities. Many students do not get where they want to go -- in particular, it is common for prospective PhD candidates to fall off the track and end up with a masters (if they are lucky). They usually end up as technicians, a step down from what they had hoped for. So go as far as you can, but be realistic about your prospects. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:45 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD In the future I will abstain from asking controversial questions (didn't realize this was one).
[ECOLOG-L] Education and Learning and Performance Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
part of the design team, and so on. So I hope someone will post comparative data (such as a course list) for the best Ed.D program in the world, and the best Ph.D program in the world as evidence of their differences. We will then be better able to more specifically judge which of them deal more closely with reality and which deal more closely with sanctification and rigidity. WT PS: What may distinguish humans from the other animals is that we have figured out how to intentionally sell our birthright for a mess of pottage. - Original Message - From: malcolm McCallum malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD If there is no difference between a Ph.D. and an Ed.D. why does almost every major university in the nation, barring Harvard, offer both degrees? On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Mitch Cruzan cru...@pdx.edu wrote: Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. Andrew D. Bailey wrote: Mitch, your opening paragraph and premise just doesn't site right with me. From my observations of the folks I've seen get PhDs, I have a hard time accepting that a PhD is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving due to any inherent intellectual prowess- that statement absolutely smacks of the elitism that gives academics a bad name. It comes off as putting yourself on some pedestal of intelligence due to a piece of paper you received. A PhD is definitely something that the majority of the population does not aspire to achieve. PhD programs obviously attract some of the best and brightest since they are the capstone degrees in most fields- but plenty of average folks receive PhDs too. I have seen very few cases where a PhD is denied to a candidate due to intellectual inferiority. I would suggest that the most important ingredient in achieving a PhD is determination, not inherent intelligence. Andrew Bailey Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. -- Mitchell B. Cruzan, Associate Professor Department of Biology P.O. Box 751 Portland State University Portland, OR 97207 http://web.pdx.edu/~cruzan/ -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/1999 - Release Date: 03/13/09 05:59:00
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Interesting, while many people do have your particular genre of learning style not all do. Some people learn best from hearing some from actually doing, and even some by teaching. While you may think that you were not taught I have to dissagree. We are all taught by somebody, something, or some experience. You just happen to be taught by a book. Learning style is just a consequence of the human condition and preference in our society has been based on written literature. I learn best by discussions as well as mistakes, therefore, I learn best by being taught through dialog or through experience. It seems to me that you did not really need to go to college to learn; all you needed was a library. Oh and how did you learn to read? I think the bigger issue here though is learning and teaching how to think critically. Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:23:07 -0500 Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD From: malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org To: fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com CC: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu Interesting. When I went to college I went there to learn, not to be taught. In fact, I often ended up spending much to much time learning tangents to what the focus of the actual course was, because that was what interested me. It took me a while to realize that it isn't what you know, but how much of what was presented in class you know! I can recall taking computer-tested multiple choice tests that were crafted with the expectation that the student's knowledge was limited to that course. this was very hard for me, because I was there to learn, not be taught. I went to the library and took out books to read more on subjects that had been glanced over in class. Ultimately, my own performance was stifled because I read about the 42 billion exceptions to a generalized rule that only had use as a teaching tool for developing a basic understanding. In my case I would much rather take a college course from a professor who placed the burden of learning on me and was the world's expert on what they were teaching. Why? because I came to school to learn, not to be taught. I can always go to his/her office hours or make an appointment to get help. At least that was my view as a freshman and it continues to be my view now. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:52 AM, christy white fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com wrote: Just as a note... The biggest problem in my education (B.S.) was not the lack of knowledge in my professors but the lack of understanding in how to convey their brilliance. The professors who understood how to pass on their knowledge in an engaging and effective manor were the ones high on my list for classes (if I had a choice). Christy A teacher who is attempting to teach without inspiring the pupil with a desire to learn is hammering on a cold iron. - Horace Mann 'It must be remembered that the purpose of education is not to fill the minds of students with facts... it is to teach them to think, if that is possible, and always to think for themselves.' -Robert Hutchins Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:06:27 -0400 From: aroad...@vt.edu Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Fellow Ecologers: I enjoy reading the debates that occur on this listserv and am content to keep my opinion to myself, however, in response to this most recent discussion (or should I say mudslinging) about the differences between a PhD and an EdD I feel compelled to express my concerns. I am not well versed in the qualities, pros, cons, frustrations, rewards, opportunities or detriments of these two degrees, but the condescending comments sent across the listserv with respect to the EdD are disheartening. They are two styles of degree with different methods and possibly different results. In certain cases, the earning of a PhD may open more doors for a person towards their specific goals, while in others the EdD may be more appropriate. My concern here is not which degree is more fitting for any specific individual, my concern is the bigoted opinions expressed. As scientists shouldn't we keep open minds about the world we live and work in? Isn't any form of higher education better than none? While in certain opinions a PhD is superior to an EdD, that shouldn't mean that an EdD is a waste of time and energy, it's just not your choice. To badmouth a practice available for furthering knowledge and understanding of any field is something that I see as impolite and intolerant. Any discussion had, journal article read, class taken or degree earned is a way that an individual has expanded their experiences and broadened their views and I cannot believe that any of it would be a waste of time or should be viewed as unworthy of the attentions of colleagues and peers. Education is what moves society forward. Please forgive me if I have spoken out of turn or offended. Sincerely, Adrian
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
What concerns me more then EdD vs PhD is getting a PhD without fist getting a Master's degree. Whenever I see an applicant with a PhD and no Master's, I view their PhD as either a glorified Master's or a watered down PhD. I know there are advantages for doing this for both the school and students but call me old school I think a PhD should be earned without any short cuts. Pete -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mitch Cruzan Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:58 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Said so well! On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 2:49 PM, William Silvert cien...@silvert.org wrote: Wow, I hope that Jay is kidding. It's only the good debates that really make lists exciting. Not all of us subscribe just for the job ads. One point that came up in several postings was the idea that some employers are prejudiced towards the PhD and that it carries more weight than it should. Also a complaint that not all PhDs are of comparable quality. No doubt about that. Nor is it unreasonable -- should those of us who want to pursue scientific careers be shut out just because we can't get into Harvard or MIT or Princeton? Still, the PhD is based on in-depth research into a field, and it is natural that if an employer wants to hire people to carry out in-depth research into a field, they are likely to prefer PhDs. Still, even formal systems can turn out to be flexible. I used to work for the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans where those of us with PhDs were classified as Professionals and were slotted into five niches for Research Scientists while those without were called Technicians and had totally different kinds of contracts (not necessarily bad, since they got overtime and we didn't, which really sucked when we were doing 24-hour stations at sea!). But somehow the good techs made it quite far, and several occupy positions just as important and influential as any PhD, including major international posts. In some countries the PhD takes a long time to finish and may be awarded well into one's career -- my wife was head of the Division of Oceanography at her institute long before she got around to finishing her PhD. I suppose the underlying issue is not which degree is better in some sese, but which one involves the kind of education that prospective employers are looking for. It is unfortunately true that not all universities place as much emphasis on teaching ability as they should, although this is not always the case -- when I was looking for jobs early in my career I applied to some four-year colleges and was rejected because they thought my research record was too good and this cast doubt on my commitment to teaching! The only real option is to pursue one's goals with a measure of pragmatism. A lot of people have had to adjust their plans, such as their intended research and teaching ideas, in the face of limited opportunities. Many students do not get where they want to go -- in particular, it is common for prospective PhD candidates to fall off the track and end up with a masters (if they are lucky). They usually end up as technicians, a step down from what they had hoped for. So go as far as you can, but be realistic about your prospects. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:45 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD In the future I will abstain from asking controversial questions (didn't realize this was one). -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
You are twisting my words. I didn't say I wasn't taught, I said I wasn't there to be taught. And as for a book or an author teaching you, neither does. As inanimate objects they are there as a resource for a person to access and learn from. Learning is an active process done by the person acquiring the knowledge. Being taught is a passive acquisition of knowledge. In all settings, there has to be a willingness to learn on the part of the student. However, I did not say i wasn't taught, I also did not say that I don't teach in my classes. You are making leaps from what I wrote. I was taught many things at all levels of educations; however, I did not come in with the attitude teach me, nor should anyone entering college. You MUST take control of your own education and give it direction. If you do not, it will be a disappointment. Malcolm On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 4:37 PM, christy white fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com wrote: Interesting, while many people do have your particular genre of learning style not all do. Some people learn best from hearing some from actually doing, and even some by teaching. While you may think that you were not taught I have to dissagree. We are all taught by somebody, something, or some experience. You just happen to be taught by a book. Learning style is just a consequence of the human condition and preference in our society has been based on written literature. I learn best by discussions as well as mistakes, therefore, I learn best by being taught through dialog or through experience. It seems to me that you did not really need to go to college to learn; all you needed was a library. Oh and how did you learn to read? I think the bigger issue here though is learning and teaching how to think critically. Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:23:07 -0500 Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD From: malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org To: fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com CC: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu Interesting. When I went to college I went there to learn, not to be taught. In fact, I often ended up spending much to much time learning tangents to what the focus of the actual course was, because that was what interested me. It took me a while to realize that it isn't what you know, but how much of what was presented in class you know! I can recall taking computer-tested multiple choice tests that were crafted with the expectation that the student's knowledge was limited to that course. this was very hard for me, because I was there to learn, not be taught. I went to the library and took out books to read more on subjects that had been glanced over in class. Ultimately, my own performance was stifled because I read about the 42 billion exceptions to a generalized rule that only had use as a teaching tool for developing a basic understanding. In my case I would much rather take a college course from a professor who placed the burden of learning on me and was the world's expert on what they were teaching. Why? because I came to school to learn, not to be taught. I can always go to his/her office hours or make an appointment to get help. At least that was my view as a freshman and it continues to be my view now. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:52 AM, christy white fatcatinalittlec...@hotmail.com wrote: Just as a note... The biggest problem in my education (B.S.) was not the lack of knowledge in my professors but the lack of understanding in how to convey their brilliance. The professors who understood how to pass on their knowledge in an engaging and effective manor were the ones high on my list for classes (if I had a choice). Christy A teacher who is attempting to teach without inspiring the pupil with a desire to learn is hammering on a cold iron. - Horace Mann 'It must be remembered that the purpose of education is not to fill the minds of students with facts... it is to teach them to think, if that is possible, and always to think for themselves.' -Robert Hutchins Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:06:27 -0400 From: aroad...@vt.edu Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Fellow Ecologers: I enjoy reading the debates that occur on this listserv and am content to keep my opinion to myself, however, in response to this most recent discussion (or should I say mudslinging) about the differences between a PhD and an EdD I feel compelled to express my concerns. I am not well versed in the qualities, pros, cons, frustrations, rewards, opportunities or detriments of these two degrees, but the condescending comments sent across the listserv with respect to the EdD are disheartening. They are two styles of degree with different methods and possibly different results. In certain cases, the earning of a PhD may open more doors for a person towards their specific goals, while in others the EdD may be more appropriate. My concern here is not which degree is more fitting for any
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Pete, Wait a second here. This has nothing to do with the debate over two terminal degrees (can't get more than a Ph.D. or Ed.D). A Masters is not a terminal degree. Many (most/all) ecology graduate programs have different requirements for students entering Ph.D. programs with a Masters versus none (50% more coursework, extra research season, later qualifiers/prelims, hence later graduation). This is explicitly addressed by the department, the committee, and the adviser, so that no Ph.D. is 'watered down'. In fact, it's everyone's job to ensure that the terminal degree is not watered down by a lack of a Masters, an underrated undergraduate school, GRE scores, the ability to speak and read and write English (TOFL) (and just poor writers who are native). So that people may come into a program with a Ph.D in Physics from China or a B.A. from a small college in rural U.S., but each candidate must work with their adviser and committee to construct a degree that is worthy of the title. There may be an advantage getting into a Ph.D. program with a Masters for just these reasons (proven track record). But those without are expected to show quickly their worth. I would look elsewhere for controversy (and this includes the Ph.D/ Ed.D. debate). There's a lot of variance in degree requirements and achievement, so that Ph.D and Ed.Ds may not differ fundamentally GIVEN the different goals of these degree seekers. There is probably much more variance in candidates, advisers, committees, departments, universities, and academic systems (countries and continents). I'm not doing the stats, though. We all try our best. Sean On Mar 13, 2009, at 1:45 PM, Pete Rissler wrote: What concerns me more then EdD vs PhD is getting a PhD without fist getting a Master's degree. Whenever I see an applicant with a PhD and no Master's, I view their PhD as either a glorified Master's or a watered down PhD. I know there are advantages for doing this for both the school and students but call me old school I think a PhD should be earned without any short cuts. Pete -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mitch Cruzan Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:58 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
that is completely a false assumption. I did a MS prior to my PHD, but when students go directly into the PHD, they still have to go through all the MS requirements prior to going through the PHD requirements. It is the same thing. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Pete Rissler peter_riss...@rissler.reno.nv.us wrote: What concerns me more then EdD vs PhD is getting a PhD without fist getting a Master's degree. Whenever I see an applicant with a PhD and no Master's, I view their PhD as either a glorified Master's or a watered down PhD. I know there are advantages for doing this for both the school and students but call me old school I think a PhD should be earned without any short cuts. Pete -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mitch Cruzan Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:58 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
By now this thread may be getting a little old and I hope I'm not beating a dead horse. But I just would like to point out that a piece of paper does not equal intelligence. I do agree with earlier folks that pointed out that drive and determination are 90% of a PhD with 10% being intelligence. There are plenty of geniuses out there driving cabs and flipping burgers. Have you ever been to a mensa meeting? I think a degree these days means a much different thing than it did 50 years ago. It used to be a big accomplishment to obtain a bachelors degree much less a PhD (so my father tells me). My father worked for the USGS as a hydrologist for over thirty years and started entry level with a bachelors in civil engineering. He worked through the years and moved up in position until he ceased doing field work and was only running analyses and writing reports. To achieve his grade at the time he retired one would need a PhD to qualify. We're in an age where motivation and a yearning to learn aren't enough. It seems now we need to be qualified by institutions and recieve a piece of paper to prove to the world we are intelligent or perhaps just competent enough to to contribute to a field of science. The funny thing nowadays is when a person follows their personal passion for a subject they haven't been trained in or recieved a degree in and they're called an amateur scientist. By these standards so would've Gregor Mendel. We must be careful to hold on to titles so dearly and remember to check our arrogance at the door. Mark Winterstein Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:54:52 -0500 From: malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU that is completely a false assumption. I did a MS prior to my PHD, but when students go directly into the PHD, they still have to go through all the MS requirements prior to going through the PHD requirements. It is the same thing. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Pete Rissler peter_riss...@rissler.reno.nv.us wrote: What concerns me more then EdD vs PhD is getting a PhD without fist getting a Master's degree. Whenever I see an applicant with a PhD and no Master's, I view their PhD as either a glorified Master's or a watered down PhD. I know there are advantages for doing this for both the school and students but call me old school I think a PhD should be earned without any short cuts. Pete -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mitch Cruzan Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:58 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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. _ Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TXT_MSGTX_WL_HM_express_032009#colortheme
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Eward Drinker Cope took only one college level course, comparative anatomy. Of course, back then they did not assign grades in college either! As we continue to create an educational system that demands less and less of its pupils, we find our performance as a country and out stature as a nation falling fast. Some state that the reason other countries are passing the US is because we educated them. Maybe the more obvious is that the Chinese, Japanese, etc. expect their students to perform, place the responsibility for learning on the students, and resultantly, the students are more prepared to excel in the real world where you boss isn't going to teach you how to sit in a cubicle, show up for work, or do your job. I recall that these were some of the major problems that modern business was having with new grads! If you make excuses for poor performance, such as the course wasn't taught great, then the students have a cop out. If you expect students to do well regardless of the situation, the learn to deal with adversity and perform as full members of society. No one learns to be self-motivated, an independent learner, or how to be responsible if they are never provided the opportunity to develop motivation, independently learn, or act responsibly. These things aren't taught, they are learned. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:29 PM, Mark Winterstein bigdoobs...@hotmail.com wrote: By now this thread may be getting a little old and I hope I'm not beating a dead horse. But I just would like to point out that a piece of paper does not equal intelligence. I do agree with earlier folks that pointed out that drive and determination are 90% of a PhD with 10% being intelligence. There are plenty of geniuses out there driving cabs and flipping burgers. Have you ever been to a mensa meeting? I think a degree these days means a much different thing than it did 50 years ago. It used to be a big accomplishment to obtain a bachelors degree much less a PhD (so my father tells me). My father worked for the USGS as a hydrologist for over thirty years and started entry level with a bachelors in civil engineering. He worked through the years and moved up in position until he ceased doing field work and was only running analyses and writing reports. To achieve his grade at the time he retired one would need a PhD to qualify. We're in an age where motivation and a yearning to learn aren't enough. It seems now we need to be qualified by institutions and recieve a piece of paper to prove to the world we are intelligent or perhaps just competent enough to to contribute to a field of science. The funny thing nowadays is when a person follows their personal passion for a subject they haven't been trained in or recieved a degree in and they're called an amateur scientist. By these standards so would've Gregor Mendel. We must be careful to hold on to titles so dearly and remember to check our arrogance at the door. Mark Winterstein Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:54:52 -0500 From: malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU that is completely a false assumption. I did a MS prior to my PHD, but when students go directly into the PHD, they still have to go through all the MS requirements prior to going through the PHD requirements. It is the same thing. On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Pete Rissler peter_riss...@rissler.reno.nv.us wrote: What concerns me more then EdD vs PhD is getting a PhD without fist getting a Master's degree. Whenever I see an applicant with a PhD and no Master's, I view their PhD as either a glorified Master's or a watered down PhD. I know there are advantages for doing this for both the school and students but call me old school I think a PhD should be earned without any short cuts. Pete -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Mitch Cruzan Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:58 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD Whether it sits right with you or not, it is true. Not everybody has the same intellectual ability, the same as we are not all able to be Olympic athletes no matter how hard we work. Otherwise, universities would not require high scores on entrance exams for undergraduate study, and we would not require our applicants to our PhD programs to perform well on GREs. This is not elitism, it is just a consequence of genetic variation in human populations. -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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
[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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu This is a quick review of some of the responses I have received for those of you who are interested. EdD wont qualify you to teach in a universitys 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
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 Jay Beugly wrote: 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Even though an Ed.D. may not be favorably considered to get a university position, I think that having education classes definitely would. During my last interview for an assistant professor position I was asked if I ever had any education courses (which I haven't). Also, during our last search, when I was a member of the search committee, we discussed favorably candidates who had an education background, but they all had Ph. D.s. Tiffany Doan Tiffany M. Doan, Ph. D. Associate Professor Department of Biology Central Connecticut State University 1615 Stanley Street New Britain, CT 06050 Phone: 860-832-2676; Fax: 860-832-2594 http://www.biology.ccsu.edu/doan/ There is grandeur in this view of life. . . from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. --Charles Darwin --- On Thu, 3/12/09, Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu wrote: From: Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu Subject: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 3:50 PM 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
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 Jay Beugly wrote: 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu This is a quick review of some of the responses I have received for those of you who are interested. EdD wont qualify you to teach in a universitys 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
This can also go against you too! I have interviewed at many schools but have never been asked about education courses. In fact, if one was to take education courses, my sibling who teaches secondary education recommend courses in classroom management, testing and grading methods, and maybe educational psychology. He has a less complimentary view of the remaining courses! Again, I think these might help one be an effective teacher, but I am not convinced that most professors are going to even look for them on your transcripts...however, you could mention it on your teaching statement. Education courses might be more important at schools where many faculty conduct pedagogy research or have previously taught at primary or secondary levels. Also, small 'teaching' schools might find these particularly attractive. Larger mid-major and major schools such as regional state university and research schools will likely not care about these. Also, if the school is a megaresearch powerhouse such as an AAU school, it might go against you! This is my perception, I have not collected or analyzed data on it, so please, do your research before you take what I say as gospel! Malcolm McCallum On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tiffany M. Doan tiffp...@yahoo.com wrote: Even though an Ed.D. may not be favorably considered to get a university position, I think that having education classes definitely would. During my last interview for an assistant professor position I was asked if I ever had any education courses (which I haven't). Also, during our last search, when I was a member of the search committee, we discussed favorably candidates who had an education background, but they all had Ph. D.s. Tiffany Doan Tiffany M. Doan, Ph. D. Associate Professor Department of Biology Central Connecticut State University 1615 Stanley Street New Britain, CT 06050 Phone: 860-832-2676; Fax: 860-832-2594 http://www.biology.ccsu.edu/doan/ There is grandeur in this view of life. . . from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. --Charles Darwin --- On Thu, 3/12/09, Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu wrote: From: Jay Beugly jsbeu...@bsu.edu Subject: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 3:50 PM 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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 -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas AM 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.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. In science, this amounts to the demonstration of the ability to conduct an original research program - to advance the field through a series of interrelated research projects; to interpret the results and provide evidentiary basis for the novelty and relevance of the contribution in the context of the existing primary literature. If my understanding of the EdD is correct, it is primarily pedagogical in focus- it demonstrates an ability to provide a simplified, but basically accurate explanation of a complex system that is understandable for an audience of a specific education level. PhD's advance the field while EdD's may explain what the philosophers did. Any PhD who conducts a research program that includes the training graduate students, and/or engages in teaching at the undergraduate level also does the work of an EdD- we get the best of both worlds. Mitch Cruzan 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 Jay Beugly wrote: 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- Mitchell B. Cruzan, Associate Professor Department of Biology P.O. Box 751 Portland State University Portland, OR 97207 http://web.pdx.edu/~cruzan/
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
It's nice to see the enlightened opinion here -- i.e., tripe -- but until someone comes up with a substantive difference between the two types of degrees, all I can conclude is that the critics of Ph.D.s are bigoted jerks better suited to wearing white sheets and burning crosses than scientists who dispassionately pursue the evidence no matter where it leads. Put up, or shut up. Comments like Tupper's and Tyson's, given that they are in print, amount to libel of anyone with an Ed.D. If you're going to criticize it in such terms, you better have evidence to back your statement up. So, what is it? Dave Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
Fellow Ecologers: I enjoy reading the debates that occur on this listserv and am content to keep my opinion to myself, however, in response to this most recent discussion (or should I say mudslinging) about the differences between a PhD and an EdD I feel compelled to express my concerns. I am not well versed in the qualities, pros, cons, frustrations, rewards, opportunities or detriments of these two degrees, but the condescending comments sent across the listserv with respect to the EdD are disheartening. They are two styles of degree with different methods and possibly different results. In certain cases, the earning of a PhD may open more doors for a person towards their specific goals, while in others the EdD may be more appropriate. My concern here is not which degree is more fitting for any specific individual, my concern is the bigoted opinions expressed. As scientists shouldn't we keep open minds about the world we live and work in? Isn't any form of higher education better than none? While in certain opinions a PhD is superior to an EdD, that shouldn't mean that an EdD is a waste of time and energy, it's just not your choice. To badmouth a practice available for furthering knowledge and understanding of any field is something that I see as impolite and intolerant. Any discussion had, journal article read, class taken or degree earned is a way that an individual has expanded their experiences and broadened their views and I cannot believe that any of it would be a waste of time or should be viewed as unworthy of the attentions of colleagues and peers. Education is what moves society forward. Please forgive me if I have spoken out of turn or offended. Sincerely, Adrian Roadman On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) m.tup...@cgiar.org wrote: 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:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
An Ed.D. does the same thing -- just in a different field. It may be solely applied research as opposed to basic research, but a lot of people get Ph.D. degrees in applied fields and no one seems to sneer at their worth. So, a Ph.D. dissertation that reveals how to improve yield of a pine plantation under changing environmental conditions is worthy of our respect, but a Ed.D. dissertation that reveals how the improve yield (in terms of concept learning and retention) among high school science students coming from disadvantaged backgrounds is not. Can you defend that distinction? Dave Mitch Cruzan wrote: There is a deeper issue here- A PhD is not just something you get, or that anybody can just get. The ability to earn a PhD in any discipline is something that the majority of the population is not capable of achieving. It's not just about hard work- A PhD is earned through the demonstration of intellectual prowess, or more specifically the ability to assimilate and explicate information from the breadth of a field of study. In science, this amounts to the demonstration of the ability to conduct an original research program - to advance the field through a series of interrelated research projects; to interpret the results and provide evidentiary basis for the novelty and relevance of the contribution in the context of the existing primary literature. If my understanding of the EdD is correct, it is primarily pedagogical in focus- it demonstrates an ability to provide a simplified, but basically accurate explanation of a complex system that is understandable for an audience of a specific education level. PhD's advance the field while EdD's may explain what the philosophers did. Any PhD who conducts a research program that includes the training graduate students, and/or engages in teaching at the undergraduate level also does the work of an EdD- we get the best of both worlds. Mitch Cruzan 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 Jay Beugly wrote: 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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu 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 -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
[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
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 jsbeu...@bsu.edu To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU 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
