Drexel DHSc program verses PhD Program

I recently asked an old professor about getting PhD. This was her response, "I think the big difference is the research focus. I see DNPs as docs in practice who come up with great ideas for evidence-based practice changes and PhDs more as academic researchers. Together, we are a good combination." First, think about what part of the equation you want to be. Were you wanting to teach nurses? Might look at programs that teach the area you really want to be. Had an old classmate start school at Duquesne University Doctor of Nursing Practice. She is more Evidence Based practice than a researcher and still wants to be a nursing educator which won't interfere with her tenure track at the university she works at.

I took a look at the website for Drexel's DHSc program. It looks like a good program, but it's not very research intensive. This would likely make it a lot harder to get a tenure track faculty position at a lot of institutions, especially at R01 institutions. You would likely be limited to clinical faculty positions or clinical instructor positions, which might be a great fit for you if you are mostly interested in teaching and not particularly interested in research.

I don't know a lot of details about those types of positions because I'm on the PhD track, but I think that you are likely to not have as much job security or be paid as well as tenure track faculty; again I think it probably depends on the school. If you want to teach at a smaller institution that isn't research-intensive, you might be in good shape with a DHSc.

Do you have a nursing school near you where you could look up faculty and their credentials, and maybe do some information interviews with faculty who have credentials that are more in line with a DHSc? If it's hard to find anyone with a DHSc or a DrPH, maybe you could include some DNPs as well (since it's also a doctorate that is not as research-intensive) and ask them about their career path.

Good luck!