DNP vs. PhD vs. EdD

I think there are some education focused DNPs.

EdD can be higher Ed teaching, administration , or both.

Another option you might consider is a DrPH.

I know that the degree debate has been the subject of heated discussion here on AllNurses and within the nursing academic community and sadly, there are no clear answers at this time. There are various doctoral-level degrees that nursing faculty can possess and each academic institution determines how these degrees are viewed, valued and if they meet the criteria for obtaining a tenure-track position. Primary examples of such degrees include the Doctor of Education (EdD), Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP), Doctor of Nursing Science (DNS, DNSc, DSN), and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.). According to Carter (2013), the first terminal degree that nurses in academia were able to receive was the EdD in the early 1900's and then came the Ph.D. The next phases in the 1950's - 1960's included the DNS/DNSc/DSN which was initially intended to be more clinically or practice focused by in most programs closely mirrored the focus, preparation and rigor of PhD programs. Although we have seen a decline in the DNS/DNSc/DSN programs because of many institutions converting these to Ph.D. programs this degree is far from extinct. In the early 2000's we saw the emergence of the DNP, which is being marketed as a clinically focused, practice doctorate degree. I think it's important to note that DNP degrees are not only for advanced practice registered nurses (APRN) such as Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNS), Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists, CRNA, Nurse Practitioners (NP) and Certified Nurse Midwives (CNM) because there are also DNP degrees with concentrations in nursing administration and nursing education as well.

I will not rehash the individual differences between PhD versus DNP or which is better than” the other. I will say that I think that DNP prepared nurses should be eligible for tenure if they can show they have made significant contributions to the nursing field just as any other faculty member would if they were applying for a tenured position. I also think that nationally should try to reexamined the criteria for tenured positions in nursing academia because I think there is a large emphasis placed on the generation of research but in some cases we forget about contributions to teaching and service which, in my opinion, should receive greater recognition. I like the idea of having two different tracks to tenure in nursing, one for research and one for clinical practice. In my education I have had teachers who have an EdD but I am not aware of their tenure status. I think it will depend on the school to determine if PhD is the only degree for tenure or if other degrees such as the EdD or DNS/DNSc/DSN are accepted. From my understanding there are many universities that do not accept DNP as a terminal degree for a tenure track position but I think that as the degree gains more popularity and becomes well established we may see a greater acceptance of DNP candidates into these types of positions.

!Chris

PS: Here are two sources that discuss this very issue, I am too tired to make it APA format so here are the links...

http://samples.jbpub.com/9781449665067/Chapter_3.pdf

http://www.aacn.nche.edu/dnp/presentations/Grid8-05.pdf

I am with you! I want that terminal degree. Now to find a program. I have heard George Mason's is fairy ok.

I am in academia full time with a DNP focused on Educational Leadership. I am not an advance practice nurse. I would say our faculty is pretty evenly divided DNP / PhD / EdD.

I too want that terminal degree...I was set on starting DNP program next year and started to ask myself again: Why do I want to go back to school? Just to be a "doctor"? I know my paycheck won't change but on the schools that I looked at as faculty prospective most of them required PhD. So, I'm still torn. DNP is quick and easy, PhD is longer and more painful...