On 02/11/2014 07:52 PM, Robert Hansen wrote: > On Feb 11, 2014, at 1:29 PM, Greg Goodknight <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > >> Ed grad schools aren't training teachers, that's mostly done in second or third tier colleges at the undergraduate level. > This is something most people don?t understand.
Or don't want to.
> And the ?graduate degree? sham isn?t limited to teaching. I had already seen the ?masters? fad come and go in STEM world.
In the real world (I'm not sure what the "STEM" world is), there certainly is a mix of BS, MS, PhD all doing the same sorts of work shoulder to shoulder, and the degree certainly does help open doors to get considered for a position but is only a minor part of the mix for salary, stock and advancement. My first employer was happy to pay for a graduate education related to ones position (they got a tax deduction) but it didn't do anything automatic for raises... that was based on performance. As I had a BS Physics and was working as an electrical/computer engineer, I was happy to round out my education on Uncle Sam's dime.
My best science and math teacher in high school studied for a PhD in English. It didn't make a difference what the PhD was in, all that the district salary schedule cared about was that there was a PhD and he'd get to the top salary rung. It does appear most working teachers go for an Ed.D. because it's the least selective for admission and the easiest to get, assuming you can stand EdSpeak, and the graduate schools of education would go through a major shrinkage if working teachers didn't get an automatic raise for taking classes and earning degrees.
> But this is an enormous advantage for attentive and knowledgable parents. And I guess it always has been. There is such a thing as a healthy mix of HS, AS, BS, MS and PhD degrees, but colleges are quite far from it. > > Bob Hansen