Differences between EdD and PhD Programs

A Mixed Methods Study

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.465

Keywords:

EdD program, PhD program, practitioner degree, doctoral degree

Abstract

The goal of this concurrent, equal status mixed methods study was to investigate the potential differences between EdD and PhD programs in the United States with the following overarching research question: Are there differences in EdD and PhD programs in schools that have both programs? Data were collected from 34 university websites where both a PhD and an EdD degree in leadership were available through a school of education. Results indicated statistically significant differences were found between EdD and PhD programs in regard to Total Credits t(66) = -2.05, p = .022, d = -0.5; Research Credits, t(50.38) = -5.38, p < .001, d = -1.32, and Culminating Projects, t(63) = -1.79, p = 0.039, d = -0.44. Qualitative analyses revealed similarities and differences between the programs. This study reinforces the concept of a practitioner degree for the EdD and the research / faculty degree for PhD.

References

Aiken, J. A., & Gerstl-Pepin, C. (2013). Envisioning the Edd and Phd as a partnership for change. Planning & Changing, 44(3/4), 162–180.

Andersen, D. G. (1983). Differentiation of the EdD and PhD in education. Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 55–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248718303400311

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communicative research. Free Press.

Brown, L. D. (1990). A perspective on the Ph. D.-Ed. D. discussion in schools of education [Conference Paper]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

Buttram, J. L., & Doolittle, V. (2015). Redesign of EdD and PhD educational leadership programs. International Journal of Educational Reform, 24(3), 282–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/105678791502400306

Capello, S. (2020). Leveraging PhD students to support EdD dissertation writing. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 5(3), 8–13.

Card, K., Chambers, C. R., & Freeman, S., Jr. (2016). Is there a core curriculum across higher education doctoral programs? International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 127–146. http://ijds.org/Volume11/IJDSv11p127-146Card2042.pdf

Carpenter, D. S. (1987). Degrees of difference?: The PhD and the EdD The Review of Higher Education, 10(3), 281–286. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1987.0024

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.

Courtenay, B. C. (1988). Eliminating the confusion over the EdD and PhD in colleges and schools of education. Innovative Higher Education, 13(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00898127

Dill, D. D., & Morrison, J. L. (1985). The EdD and the PhD research training in the field of higher education: A survey and a proposal. Review of Higher Education, 8, 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1985.0027

Flood, L. D. (2024). Centering the Scholarly Practitioner Within the EdD: Lessons Learned. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 9(2), 31–33.

Foster, H. A., Chesnut, S., Thomas, J., & Robinson, C. (2023). Differentiating the EdD and the PhD in higher education: A survey of characteristics and trends. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 8(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.288

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A-G., & Buchner, A. (2019). G*power (Version 3.1.9.4). Heinrich Heiner Universitat. https://www.psychologie.hhu.de/arbeitsgruppen/allgemeine-psychologie-und-arbeitspsychologie/gpower

Guthrie, J. W. (2009). The case for a modern doctor of education degree (EdD): Multipurpose education doctorates no longer appropriate. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560802679526

Guthrie, J. W., & Marsh, D. D. (2009). Strategies for elevating the public and professional regard of the EdD Peabody Journal of Education, 84(1), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560802679773

Johnson, R.B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Allyn & Bacon.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & quantity, 43, 265–275.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Guidelines for conducting and reporting mixed research in the field of counseling and beyond. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88(1), 61–69.

Leist, J., & Scott, J. (2011). Differentiation... but to what degree? The Ed. D. and Ph. D. in higher education programs. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 9(3), 7. https://doi.org/10.58809/CENR4928

Osguthorpe, R. T., & Wong, M. J. (1993). The PhD versus the EdD: Time for a decision. Innovative Higher Education, 18(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01742197

Perry, J. A. (2012). To Ed. D. or not to Ed. D.?. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(1), 41–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400108

Toma, J. D. (2002). Legitimacy, differentiation, and the promise of the Ed. D. in higher education [Opinion Paper] Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Sacramento, CA.

U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-data

Walker, D. W., & Haley-Mize, S. (2012). Content analysis of PhD and EdD dissertations in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35(3), 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406411431168

Downloads

Published

2025-04-24

How to Cite

Lamont–Manfre, M., Munnelly, P., L. Leech, N., & A. Haug, C. (2025). Differences between EdD and PhD Programs: A Mixed Methods Study . Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 10(2), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.465

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): Regular Issue

Section

Research Manuscripts

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Marisha Lamont–Manfre, Patrick Munnelly, Nancy L. Leech, Carolyn A. Haug

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.