next »

[peppymrscaudle]

I've been a lurker for sometime and I have done a lot of reading on post regarding the Ed.D vs Ph.D and I hate to continue to beat a dead horse but I do have a question.

I will be earning my M.Ed in the fall from a school in GA. I explained my career goals to my advisor and she suggested I apply for the schools Ed.S program. The problem is, I would like to get a Ph.D but this particular school does not offer that--they offer an Ed.D. I don't see a point in obtaining an Ed.S if I'm going for a Ph.D because in my mind it's just a waste of money. But she (who has a Ph.D but did an Ed.S also) seems to think that since I would like to become TT and teach for a while then work my way up to Provost, that this is the best option for me. Her reasoning is I already have experience ( I was a high school teacher for 2  years and taught Astronomy at a 4 year University/I also have experience working in University development for 2 years)  until I finish my program this would secure me a job with this school. I'm very interested in the Ph.D. programs at UGA and South Carolina and it wouldn't be a stretch for us to move to Athens or Columbia. I've been researching both programs for roughly 2 years now, making campus visits and contacting currently enrolled students through Facebook.

I semi-jokingly told her my ultimate goal is to become President of a University one day. Which is technically a goal of mine, but I wouldn't be hurt if it didn't happen. I've talked to several of my professors and they seem to agree that I should go for the Ed.S and the Ph.D--but I honestly can not seem to understand the reasoning behind that. Surprisingly none of them have pushed me towards the schools Ed.D programs (they are actually trying to get rid of it and change it to a Ph.D).

I figure at 27, there's no point in prolonging school any more than I have to. With 1 1/2 kids and a husband who has graciously moved several times so I can attend school, I really just want to get it over with soon so he can go back and earn his DBA. Earning a Ph.D. seems to be the only other degree I need at this point. Does anyone here have an Ed.S in addition to their Ph.D or Ed.D? Or should I take my advisor's advice and go for it then get a Ph.D.? I don't think it will make me more competitive with a Ph.D program if they see I have a Ed.S. but then again, you never know.

Sorry my post is so long--I am just really confused by all of these degrees and I want to make sure I make the right decision that can best secure me the position I want.

[msparticularity]

I'm having a little trouble sorting through the information you have shared so far and figuring out exactly what it is that you hope to teach, to begin your career--let alone how you are envisioning the trajectory. You mention that you are completing your master's degree in education, but don't mention what field it is in; are you working in higher ed, or P-12? As you suspect, you will definitely need a doctorate to gain a TT position in education, but if (for example) you want to teach in a department of curriculum and instruction then your two years of high school teaching experience will probably not be enough--the normal requirement is in the neighborhood of 3-5 years of contract experience at the P-12 level.

If you are working toward a faculty position in educational administration/higher education, then I think you need to consider carefully what you are doing now, and where you hope it will lead. I would guess that your advisor is urging the Ed.S. because you are not actually ready for a PhD--that you lack the practical experience in working within the field, and/or the research grounding that would be needed to succeed in a doctoral program in these fields. Two years of development experience is certainly related to higher ed administration, but not so much to any of the other goals you say you are working toward.

I'm also curious about what on earth makes you identify a provost's position as your ambition--why do you see yourself there, and have you actually investigated the background of some real-life provosts to see what their preparation has been? You will quickly discover that the vast majority began as faculty members in a university-level subject area other than higher ed, which is usually the purview of folks who want to work on the student affairs and/or management side.

[higheredguy]

Don't get an EdS and PhD. I for the life of me can't figure out why this is the advice you have given except "that's what I did". Are these people president's and provost's? I would suggest going for the PhD. What will concentration be? Since you haven't completely ruled it out..... I would also give a strong look to some EdD programs (Penn, Harvard, Vandy, UGA) Just thinking out loud here.

[zharkov]

I don't live in GA, so my comments may or may not apply, but in my neck of the woods, an MEd is the basic credential for someone who wants to teach K12.  If a person wants to move up to something like curriculum director, assistant principal, or principal, they often get post-master's education via an Ed.S., CAGS, or attend NISL.   The Ed.S (or CAGS) is usually in something like educational leadership, curriculum, SpEd, and such.  So my first question is in what area would this Ed.S. be in?   The other thing to look into is if you can transfer any of the Ed.S. credits into an Ed.D. or Ph.D. program. 

If your goal is to obtain a TT job, I don't know if the Ed.S. will help, since it seems like a practitioner's degree.  The Ph.D. (or Ed.D) is what matter.  At the same time, people I know who have TT positions in education departments have more than a couple of years of K12 experience, typically 5 or 10 years.  I would suggest you investigate that by speaking to your advisors and other faculty.

[tee_bee]

Get a PhD. Be good at what you do. I never understood people who wanted to provosts and whatnot before they even really understood what serious academic research/teaching/service is really like. There's no substitute for having the degree and the experience before setting one's sights on higher administration. I'm a lower-level administrator with few pretensions of moving up, and I've never been a big fan of administrators who really didn't develop their scholarly chops. That is, administrators whose jobs are core academic functions like research admin or curriculum and instruction. F&A types and whatnot are likely to come from relevant professions.

The Ed.S. sounds like a major waste of time. This is an opinion, though, not a settled fact.

[peppymrscaudle]

My Master's is in Higher Ed administration. Thats what this school offers.  I do have a tteaching credential for K-12 in Astronomy and English Lit (MAT), but was laid off due to budget cuts which is why I went back and decided to teach at the college level. I was a lab instructor at a major university for Astronomy for a little bit. Forigve me, its exam week and my mind is all over the place finishing my portfolio and studying.

My advisor is over the graduate program and currently trying to get to a Dean position at a Big Ten school. My uncle is a Provost at a smaller college in the west so thats why I desire to go that route. It basically boils down to- this is what I did, so you should too.

[peppymrscaudle]

My post was cut off-

I worked in the Provost office as a student, and had a really close relationship with our Provost who is now the President of major University. I was given great advice and knew a lot about the politics of higher ed. I am really close with prior professors and department heads of my undergrad University, I spoke with one earlier who suggested I get the Ph.D in Higher Ed or one of my disciplines. Everyone jas advice for me, and I'm listening to all of it. Most programs give you until December to apply so I certainly have time to figure it out.

Forgive my random all over the place post-between school, a 2 year and being 7 months pregnant- my mind is in a fog.

[zharkov]

As the chief academic officer of a university, the provost typically is expected to have had a career in scholarship before moving into administration.  An ideal sequence would look like:  PhD -> assistant professor -> tenured associate professor -> full professor -> department chair -> dean -> provost.   It may be possible to skip a step or two along the way, but don't count on it. 

I can't for the life of me see where an Ed.S. would fit in.
 

[msparticularity]

As the chief academic officer of a university, the provost typically is expected to have had a career in scholarship before moving into administration.  An ideal sequence would look like:  PhD -> assistant professor -> tenured associate professor -> full professor -> department chair -> dean -> provost.   It may be possible to skip a step or two along the way, but don't count on it. 

I can't for the life of me see where an Ed.S. would fit in.
 

I absolutely agree--with perhaps one caveat in the area of the Ed.S. Reading between the lines of the first post, it sounded as if the advisor's reason for the Ed.S. was that the OP would have a funded assistantship on campus (aka: a job in higher ed) while working on the degree, which would provide more professional experience, along with more research grounding. However, the Ed.S. is most certainly a practitioner's degree.

OP, your description of why you want to be a Provost is fundamentally unconvincing, I'm afraid--mostly because it shows no real understanding of what is actually involved in the job, especially in relation to the preparation needed. I would suggest that you should pause and think about what specific aspects of the job (as you observed it) attracted you, then figure out what you should do next. In particular, given that you seem to be willing to relocate for a career in higher education (and you definitely would have to!), I am wondering why you are not willing to relocate for a P-12 teaching job, now that you are trained for it?   

[simplesimon]

Your query reminds me of a post by dayleys01; I found his post annoying.
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,70907.msg1656910.html#msg1656910

You do not have the wherewithal to decide between a Ph.D. and an Ed.S. (by your own admission you are “confused”) yet you think you want to be a provost?  I suspect many readers of the Administrative Track forum will find references to your endgame alternately amusing and annoying.  As someone said previously, “Many people who post to the admin forum need a reality check. It gets frustrating to read posts from folks with unrealistic expectations about their qualifications for admin jobs and/or with a real lack of knowledge about the nature and types of admin work.”  You do not yet have a master’s degree.  Climb one mountain at a time! 

References to your uncle the Provost are unconvincing and they make you sound wholly unsophisticated.  You appear clueless about the very long road to the provost’s office and about how many things can go wrong along the way.  For example, being admitted to a good Ph.D. program, finishing the degree, landing a TT position, earning tenure, etc.  Rant over.

My advice: forget the Ed.S.  Get a Ph.D. from the best graduate program that you can get into.  Good luck.

[aristotlex]

I thought I would chime in on this discussion. I am not sure what an Ed.S. is, but you seemed to be asking about EdD. v PhD. Here are my thoughts.

Despite what you read on these forums, the EdD is a legitimate degree and its meaning, just like the PhD, depends on the school you get it from. Most of the people commenting on EdD degrees here sound like they really do not know what they are talking about.

Is a PhD or EdD Walden Online University the same as those offered by Harvard? I certainly don't think so.  However, both degrees come from 'accredited' schools that offer you a piece of paper that confer an academic degree. It obviously depends where you get the degree from.

As for the degree type, I think the same applies. Is an EdD inferior to a PhD? I think it really depends where you got it from and their program of study. For example, I am getting my EdD from Durham University in England. Durham University is a very prestigious British university. If you look at the PhD and EdD program side-by-side, they are pretty much the same, but keeping in the British tradition the PhD has no coursework (even at Oxford and Cambridge) whereas the EdD does? My degree will require a dissertation that is expected to make an original contribution to knowledge in the field of education. My defense and dissertation examination will be exactly like those getting the PhD. Is my degree inferior? Is it a lesser doctorate? I don't think so. This type of discussion is stupid, and to some degree ignorant, in my opinion.

If we look at the US, are all the EdDs conferred by Teachers College at Columbia University less than equivalent programs at other universities that call their degree PhD instead of EdD? As you can see, this get pretty silly -- dare I say, stupid. If the university you are applying for is made of such shallow and arrogant faculty that they discriminate against you because you degree says EdD instead of PhD without a deeper examination of what work was actually done, then it is an institution you really want to work at? I wouldn't.

In my case, I consider myself an educationalist. I want to research, teach, and perhaps work in administration within the academic discipline of education. It would seem very odd for an education department to discriminate against me because I have a DOCTORATE IN EDUCATION, doesn't it?

When it comes to educational administration, I would imagine that your degree is only one aspect of the profile they are looking at. Your track record, people skills, and management skills are also very important. A PhD is not magic. It does not give the person some special power of administration. Anybody in grad school knows that. My point is you are more than your degree and I personally do not think that having a PhD or an EdD is going to make a huge difference.

[leobloom]

I'm not sure how best to put it, but the quality of writing (from someone with English teaching credentials, among others) behooves me to think that maybe the adviser's suggestion is well-intended. Probably a PhD is not for everyone.

[schoolmarm]

An EdS is an Education Specialist degree.  It is a terminal degree (like an MFA in many fields) and is NOT a doctorate.  It is a degree for education practitioners mostly at the K-12 level.  At some universities you are not allowed to do an EdD or PhD if you have the EdS.

I would not go for the Specialist degree.  Let your hubby get his DBA, while you get experience in the field.  In the education field, it is very common for PhD students to be older since working in the field is a great advantage. 

[zharkov]

An EdS is an Education Specialist degree.  It is a terminal degree (like an MFA in many fields) and is NOT a doctorate.  It is a degree for education practitioners mostly at the K-12 level.  At some universities you are not allowed to do an EdD or PhD if you have the EdS.

I would not go for the Specialist degree.  Let your hubby get his DBA, while you get experience in the field.  In the education field, it is very common for PhD students to be older since working in the field is a great advantage. 

A CAGS (Certificate of Advanced Graduate Studies) is similar to an Ed.S., more common in some states, and typically entails 10 to 15 post-masters courses.  Such programs are mostly for K12 licensure as curriculum directors, principals, and superintendents.  Not sure if I would consider an Ed.S. a terminal degree, since doctoral programs often take some Ed.S. or CAGS courses toward completion of doctoral requirements.  (Since they are post-masters programs.)   I am shocked to hear that some universities would refuse admission to a doctoral program if one held an Ed.S., since the situation is almost the opposite in my area. (Applying post-masters work Ed.S. or CAGS to a doctorate.)
   

[msparticularity]

An EdS is an Education Specialist degree.  It is a terminal degree (like an MFA in many fields) and is NOT a doctorate.  It is a degree for education practitioners mostly at the K-12 level.  At some universities you are not allowed to do an EdD or PhD if you have the EdS.

I would not go for the Specialist degree.  Let your hubby get his DBA, while you get experience in the field.  In the education field, it is very common for PhD students to be older since working in the field is a great advantage.  

A CAGS (Certificate of Advanced Graduate Studies) is similar to an Ed.S., more common in some states, and typically entails 10 to 15 post-masters courses.  Such programs are mostly for K12 licensure as curriculum directors, principals, and superintendents.  Not sure if I would consider an Ed.S. a terminal degree, since doctoral programs often take some Ed.S. or CAGS courses toward completion of doctoral requirements.  (Since they are post-masters programs.)   I am shocked to hear that some universities would refuse admission to a doctoral program if one held an Ed.S., since the situation is almost the opposite in my area. (Applying post-masters work Ed.S. or CAGS to a doctorate.)
    

My experience suggests that it is not so much that a university would refuse to admit someone with the EdS or CAGS, but that these certidications would in no way be more helpful than just a master's degree. It certainly might be necessary, though, for someone with an EdS to persuade a doctoral institution that they want to shift gears and focus upon a research trajectory--to demonstrate that they understand the difference between their prior studies and what they now propose to do.

And very frankly, ability to read and write critically and elegantly would certainly differentiate between the two trajectories. An active research career demands very different skills than one focused solely upon practice.