Reclaiming Education’s Doctorates: A Critique and a Proposal
- 1 April 2006
- journal article
- Published by American Educational Research Association (AERA) in Educational Researcher
- Vol. 35 (3), 25-32
- https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x035003025
Abstract
The problems of the education doctorates are chronic and crippling. The purposes of preparing scholars and practitioners are confused; as a result, neither is done well. We must move forward on two fronts simultaneously: rethinking and reclaiming the research doctorate (the Ph.D.), with its strong links to practice, and developing a robust and distinct practice doctorate (the P.P.D.) with a distinctive scholarly base. Unlike most current education Ph.D.s and Ed.D.s, the two degrees would serve distinct purposes, and like their medical analogs—the biomedical Ph.D. and the M.D.—would have different curricula and assessments. Building on lessons learned in the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate and in the Carnegie Foundation’s studies of preparation for the professions, we argue that this reform is necessary and possible.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Signature pedagogies in the professionsDaedalus, 2005
- EMPLOYMENT & SALARY SURVEYChemical & Engineering News, 2004
- The Triumph of Hope Over Experience in the Search for “What Works”: A Response to SlavinEducational Researcher, 2004
- Contestation and Change in National Policy on “Scientifically Based” Education ResearchEducational Researcher, 2003
- Eliminating the Doctor of Education Degree: It's the Right Thing to DoThe Educational Forum, 1998
- The Ph.D. versus the Ed.D.: Time for a decisionInnovative Higher Education, 1993
- EdD and PhD Research Training in the Field of Higher Education: A Survey and a ProposalThe Review of Higher Education, 1985
- Differentiation of the Ed.D. and Ph.D. in EducationJournal of Teacher Education, 1983