Essentially i am looking for material on the debate between the need for a PHD in higher education vs the competencies of other sorts of practitioners/educators/teachers.
Some professors let you speacialize in medicine first after you have written a PhD. Writing a PhD gives you a logic way of thinking and a base to evidence test your findings.
PhD is still an important ticket to get employment in academia, with respect to dominating legal regulations at most institutions of higher learning. For practice, the master of research level is sufficient.
Academia is about sorting and archiving knowledge, so you need an overwhelming interest in theoretical work in depth (doing by learning).Practitioners can walk over such painful details as it only counts that you can make things work (learning by doing). Imo, your query Niret Alva is practically about different levels of learning processes, in terms of basic or applied research. We should identify and follow our talents and be aware about our abilities.
Thank you Beatrice and Stephen. Actually i was looking for studies that investigate whether a doctorate holder is necessarily a better "teacher" than one without a doctorate!
