On Feb 11, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Greg Goodknight <email@example.com> wrote:
> 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.
I meant that there are cases for advanced degrees but it depends heavily on the field. Obviously, things like medicine and law require long periods of academic study, but in the world of technology (not teaching it, doing it), an advanced degree is generally a red flag. I am not counting the ubiquitous MBA which is actually not an advanced degree but a second (minor) degree. Many fields are simply so much about current experience that staying in school past a BS actually puts you behind, not ahead.
> 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.
Other costs (like health care) are driving that perk away. And (as you sort of say) that perk was never a game changer, other than as a tax friendly fringe benefit with which to lure future employees.
> 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.
When I think about teachers I think all the way from kindergarten through college. I see very little necessity or even sensibility in having a PhD in the lower grades. There really isn?t anything in college, past 4 years, that is going to help you teach better than actual teaching experience. I can understand the need for more academic study with regards to more advanced subjects, but not with the art of teaching itself. In other words, I would find it rarer for a PhD to be a good fit teaching high school versus a non PhD, simply because the non PhD has so much more experience with teaching than the PhD. Later, in college, because of the (allegedly) advancing material, it goes without saying that many of the teachers will be PhD?s. It still doesn?t mean they are good teachers.:)