Talk:Professional degree/Archive 1

Get Rid of the "First"
I would get rid of the word "First" in the title of this article. Some first professional degrees are undergraduate degrees (e.g. Bachelor of Fine Arts, Bachelor of Music, and Bachelor of Laws in countries where law is an undegraduate subject - which is most of them worldwide); other first professional degrees are graduate/post-graduate degrees, such as Medicis Doctor, Doctor of Jurisprudence, and so on.

It should be quite sufficient to have a single article that discusses ALL professional degrees, whether they are first, second, third, or ninety-fifth. A separate article specifically for FIRST professional degrees is nothing less than ridiculous.

76.126.3.38 (talk) 18:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe your analysis on what is a first professional degree is incorrect, nevertheless I believe you are correct that the word "first" should be removed from the title of this page as this page seems to be more generally about degrees that prepare one for a profession. An area limited to actual "first professional degrees" could be just a subheader.--TDJankins (talk) 21:17, 13 January 2014 (UTC)


 * This seems reasonable, particularly since the category of "first professional degree" no longer officially exists in the US. As nobody else seems to have chimed in, I will investigate moving the page - it may be non-trivial as 'Professional degree' was moved here and has a substantial edit history. Robminchin (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

MSPAS is not an "Advanced Professional Degree"
How is it that Physician Assistant (MSPAS) is an "Advanced Professional Degree" and is not a "First Professional Degree"? As I understand, there is no degree prior to the MSPAS that is generally required by law or regulation to practice the profession of Physician Assistant without limitation and therefore stating that the MSPAS is an "Advanced Professional Degree" is in my humble opinion a bit presumptuous. With that logic one could then assert that any of the Master's level degrees are then "Advanced Professional Degree", for example the Master of Nursing (MN) degree because not only is it a Master degree but there are also subordinate degrees (Associate and Bachelor degree level) that admit practice to the profession of Nursing without limitation. I believe that the Physician Assistant (MSPAS) degree should be edited from the "Advanced Professional Degree" to the "First Professional Degree" and seek consensus on this topic before making said edit. Any opinions in favor or against this edit will be appreciated. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.42.16 (talk) 08:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, just wondering that possibly the MN (not to be confused with the MSN) degree should be moved to the "Advanced Professional Degree" profession? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.42.16 (talk) 09:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Confusing Statement
I'm a little confused by the following statement:

"Similarly, the American MD (Doctor of Medicine) is a notch below the Ph.D. in Medical Science (such as anatomy, pathology, ophthalmology, genetics, neurology, etc.) for academic research."

What, exactly, is meant by 'notch below.' They both require 4 years of university education (however, the M.D requires at least 3 extra years, up to 7 for neurosurgery, of additional training). Sure, an M.D. is not an anatomist, a pathologist, or any of those others, but this is like comparing apples and oranges. For example, an M.D. doesnt know more about anatomy than an anatomist, but an anatomist doesnt know more than an M.D. about treating illness. Does that make them a 'notch below' someone with a Ph.D. in anatomy? I guess I'm asking what the reasoning is for descibing an M.D. as a notch below a Ph.D. in the medical science subject area.

A Social Scientist's response: IT IS THE QUALITY AND RIGOR (NOT QUANTITY, the number of years in training) OF THE PH.D. THAT DIFFERENTIATE IT FROM OTHER PROF. DEGREES INCLUDING THE MD. Ph.D. students are ASSUMED to have mastered the coursework at the Masters & Undergraduate levels and most Ph.D. students hold previous degrees in the same field. Therefore, Ph.D. classes are much more theoretical/analytical/quantitative than their "Professional Doctorate" counterparts. A US-style MD is equivalent to an Undergraduate degree in medicine offered in other countries, and as a FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREE, absolutely no prior knowledge in Medicine is required (so classes generally are less rigorous than Ph.D. level courses). The Ph.D. is well-known to be harder to earn than any other professional degrees. Harvard, for instance, accepts about 900 students for its MD program but less than 10 for its MD-Ph.D program.

Best.


 * I see you have no knowledge of either degree; the PhD is arguably easier of the 2, though longer. As for the numbers for harvard, or any other institutions' small md-phd programs that is due entirely to 1) low demand for the dual degree and 2) the programs are each funded by NIH, funding for which is limited.

Social Scientist's Response: Not really, a typical Ph.D. prgram in the US is about 8 years (after high school, although the average number of years is about 12), compared to the standard MD program which I was refering to(4+4+ (at least 3 years of residecncy = at least 11 yeasrs total).  DDS/DMD, PharmD, DVM, DC, DPM... typically spend 8 years (4 + 4+ additional training).  Most academics, if not all, would agree that the Ph.D. is harder to earn.  The acceptance rate for most Ph.D. programs is less than 10% (vs. 20-50% for professional programs). Just think a bit, how can you compare rigor of the typical professional program to the Ph.D. in, say, Physics, Biochemistry, Genetics, Economics...?  Also, look at the standardized test scores of those with Ph.Ds and professional degree holders (ETS can tell you that the difference is enormous!). On a personal note, I have 2 MD friends (both Asst. Prof. at the time) who got enrolled into a Ph.D. program in a Biological Science but quit after the first semester.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.86.236.128 (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.184.208 (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, but my main concern is that much of that section - indeed, much of this article - reads like original research. It should be sourced, and unsourced material should be removed. Vicenarian  (T · C) 22:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The MD is a graduate degree in medicine (in the United States) and the terminal degree, there is no degree above it, and the PhD is a seperate degree all together that has nothing to do with medicine. They teach entirely different things, and in the US many hold both degrees. While the MD is necessary and sufficient to practice medicine, the PhD is sufficient but not necessary to recieve NIH funding and a university position to undertake research. Fuzbaby (talk) 00:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

To User Fuzbaby, that is not entirely true. Yes, most US medical (MD) graduates do not obtain a postgraduate medical degree.. However, every MD graduate is required to obtain some "graduate medical education". The US MD (or any medical degree for that matter) is considered "undergraduate medical education", and "postgraduate medical education" is further training in any specific field of medicine. That can be either in the form of residency training, research training, or other such program. Master's degrees in specific fields of medicine which are only available to applicants who have obtained a medical degree (MD/MBBS, etc) are more common in UK (commonwealth) training systems... however, even in the United States there are "some" Masters degrees only for MD's so that they can obtain further training in a specific field. (example: This guy got his MSc in Otolaryngology from the University of Iowa, and this MSc available at McGill). So, to say that the MD is the both the entry level/lowest and at the same time the highest/terminal degree one can possibly earn in Medicine in the United States I feel is not really true. Jwri7474 (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Harvard and a few other US universities offer advanced professional degrees in Medicine and Dentistry, too (see the DSMC on their websites).


 * As an aside, some of the numbers and comments listed above are completely off. Rather than debate something, I think it would be more useful for the IP editor to learn more about PhD programs before posting more comments/questions.Fuzbaby (talk) 16:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Professional doctorates
The June 22 2007 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education has a great article on the rise of professional doctorates from professional M.S. degrees in the U.S. (e.g., physical and occupational therapy), and concerns related to them. JJL 02:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

MBA as a Professional Degree
An MBA is NOT an advanced professional degree. It is arguably not a professional degree at all. Professional degrees are typically necessary for the practice of a particular profession. General business is not a "profession," and an MBA confers no specific privilege. At the very least, at two years with no prior topical education necessary, it is not "advanced," in the context of professional degrees.


 * I'm not sure why you say so. Zoticogrillo (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

NPOV and citations
I edited out a lot of POV content regarding the comparability of a MD, DDS or JD in the US to a similar professional degree outside the US. One sentence I removed stated that a MD, DDS and JD are actually professional undergraduate degrees. This statement was followed by a citation that did not support that POV, which is an additional issue. The justification for this article is further questionable, as there is evidence that it's a POV branch of the professional degree article. Zoticogrillo (talk) 00:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Opps, I meant that I think it's a POV fork. Zoticogrillo (talk) 00:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Professional and academic degree
As explained in my edit, professional degrees and academic degrees are mutually exclusive categories. Why then retain the definition of a professional degree as an academic degree? Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Well...at the first instance, a professional degree is a college degree, hence a degree from an academy, hence an academic degree (vice a Fahrenheit degree or the third degree or some other use of the term 'degree'). Within college degrees, some are considered truly academic while otehrs are considered professional. So, I made a dierct link to academic degrees but what I really wanted was an indication that a prof. degree is a type of college degree, not a Masonic degree or sonme such. I wanted a clear defn. in the first sentence (not that I really think it'll be confused with any of the above, frankly). Let me try a change. JJL (talk) 14:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Good change. Thanks.  But I think that in this instance, specificity is key, because there is an important difference in a professional degree (e.g. bachelor in accounting or engineering) and an academic one (e.g. bachelor in sociology).  For many readers, the terms "academic" and "research" are interchangable.  Therefore, I think that linking to "academic degree" is still not ideal.  We could remove the link altogether, as it is not necessary, and add a link to the "academic degree" article as a related article at the end of this article, if it's not already there.  Confirm? Zoticogrillo (talk) 16:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that 'academic' is being used in both a general and a specific sense here and that's a bit confusing given the specific subject of this article. To me the main thing is that the first sentence should say something like "A first professional degree is a type of university degree that..." in order to clearly define the term. Right now Academic degree uses the term in the broad sense, and I don't think that's inappropriate (at least not w.r.t. the U.S.). Indeed, in Academic degree the first sentence says "A degree is..." so perhaps it should be moved to University degree and the redirects switched. But frankly it's fine by me as is. A (first) prof. degree is a type of academic degree; regrettably, the language has evolved so that it's a professional academic degree ratehr than an academic academic degree. JJL (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * So-called "professional degrees" are awarded by universities upon successful completion of an academic program of study. In that sense, professional degrees are definitely "academic degrees". Hence, contrary to what Zoticogrillo says, "professional degrees" and "academic degrees" cannot be "mutually exclusive".


 * On the other hand, it is true however that "professional degrees" are not "research degrees" (like the PhD or the ScD) since they are not awarded on the basis of completion of a substantial body of original research that is worthy of publication in peer-reviewed journals and makes a significant (and relevant) novel contribution to existing knowledge in the broader field of study to which the research topic is related. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 17:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

J.D. and LL.B. comparison
Please see talk page of J.D. for information on the difference between LL.B. and J.D. Citations should be added to POV that LL.B. = J.D. in every respect. Zoticogrillo (talk) 02:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

In the US the terminal degree in Law would the the Doctor of Judicial Science, not the JD or LLB - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_degree Jwri7474 (talk) 02:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * An interesting issue. I have not found any sources that say one way or the other.  There is evidence that the J.D. is considered a terminal degree by some in that the highest degree of the president of Columbia University (Lee Bollinger) is a J.D. (a terminal degree is required to be a university president).  The wiki article you cite is not really correct.  The JD and DJS are very different and cannot be compared because a JD is a professional program and the DJS is an academic program.  The terminal professional degree for law in the US is the JD, but the terminal academic degree is the DJS or PhD in law. See [this document] (at page 9) that defines Professional Doctorate, and [this document] (at page 8) that talks about how a professional and academic (or research) degree are different and one can't be seen as superior than the other. Zoticogrillo (talk) 10:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that the Terminal degree is the same thing as the first degree (only one degree you can earn in the field of law)? What about an LLM? (the JD is below the LLM) I understand what you're saying, however the LLM is a "professional law degree" (not to mention the DJS) and is above the JD, meaning the JD is not a terminal degree in the subject of Law. Where did get the information that you "must have a terminal degree to be a president"? Also, just because the president at one particular university claims his JD is a terminal degree, doesn't mean that the JD in general world wide now becomes a terminal degree. Jwri7474 (talk) 19:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Please provide citations for your claims. It saves time.
 * The LLM is not higher than the JD because the LLM is also a research or academic degree, and the J.D. is a professional degree. You can easily say, however, that the LLM is lower than the PhD or DJS because they are both research degrees.
 * For example, the LLM programs at the University of Washington school of law are under the category of "academic programs". Also, if you choose the "online application" link for those LLM programs (such as this one it directs you to the application process through the graduate school.  For their Asian Law program, their website states that admission must be through the graduate school as well as the Asian Law Center.
 * I cannot find anything anywhere that says the LLM is a professional degree, because it is not. There has been talk in some schools of making a professional LLM, such as in taxation, but this has not yet happened.  Traditionally, the LLM has been seen as a route to becoming a law professor, and not a better attorney.  You will notice that the sources I cited previously do not list the LLM as among the professional degrees. Zoticogrillo (talk) 03:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You have not provided any support for the claim that the DJS is a professional degree.
 * My example of Lee Bollinger is not an isolated incident. He was also the president of the University of Michigan.  The president of Harvard University, Derek Curtis Bok also had a J.D. as his highest degree.  This document, in the third full paragraph on page two, is an example of the traditional university policy that a university president must have "a Ph.D. or someting equivalent," i.e. a terminal degree.
 * This job listing for a professor states that the professor should have "A terminal degree in management (PhD, DBA) or law (JD)" (see the fourth add from the bottom, entitled "Division of Business, Economics and Communication"). That is an example of a university that believes that the J.D. is a terminal degree.
 * I don't believe it is useful to consider a professional degree as a terminal degree, because the principle concern of a professional degree is entering a profession, not obtaining academic distinction. Zoticogrillo (talk) 04:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The LLM is a Professional degree in Law as well as an "academic degree", I think we are getting mixed up in the language here. Most people enter a LLM degree after obtaining their JD degree as a way to "specialise" in particular field of law. Both the (JD and LLB) are equal basic entry level law degrees and are not "terminal" (or said another way the "highest level") degree you can earn in the field of law. In your last sentence it seems you agree with me on this point when you said, "I don't believe it is useful to consider a professional degree as a terminal degree".

Again, just because a couple of presidents of universities have JD degrees, does not de facto make them terminal degrees in the field of law, simply that the universities find it an attractive qualification to have for those applying for the position. A JD/LLB is not equal to a PhD. The US board of education states this, when they said professional doctorates are not true doctorates equivalent to a PhD. This statement "is" cited if you will review the article. Jwri7474 (talk) 09:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I provided some evidence that the requirement for being a university president is a terminal degree, and I provided examples of university presidents with a J.D. degree. It does take an exercise of logic to connect the two, but it is one of the most simple type.  The source I provided does not state that a terminal degree is "an attractive qualification to have," but a requirement.
 * I agree with you that neither a JD nor a LLB is equal to a PhD. A research degree and a professional degree are very different.  In saying, "A JD/LLB is not equal to a PhD," are you saying that a JD and LLB are equivalent?  This is problematic, as a JD is a graduate degree (see this website, and this one), and the JD is a professional degree (see citation above).  A LLB is neither a graduate program nor a doctorate (obviously).  You'll have to verify your claim that an LLB is equivalent.
 * The citation I found in the article is this http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-professional-studies.html, is that what you are talking about?
 * That article states that, "first-professional degrees in these fields are first degrees, not graduate research degrees. Several of the degree titles in this group of subjects (see Degrees Awarded below) incorporate the term "Doctor," but they are not research doctorates and not equivalent to the Ph.D." It does not say in this article that professional doctorates are not true doctorates.  It does say that there is a difference between research doctorates and professional doctorates.  You can't put two items from different categories into a hierarchy.  This article at page 8 verifies that there is such a thing as a professional doctorate, that it is different than a research doctorate, and comparing it to a research doctorate is not valid.
 * You have still not responded to the request for a citation that a DJS is a professional degree.
 * But returning to where we started, neither the DJS nor the LLM is a terminal professional degree, but the DJS is a terminal research degree. You made that claim in response to my request for support of the argument that the J.D. = LL.B.  If you have responded to my prompt, I didn't understand it. Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

"Graduate" LLB program is 3 years long and requires a previous bachelors for admission Yale Law school also offered LLB degrees up until the mid 70s when they changed to the JD degree. But guess what... regardless if you gradated in 1972 with an LLB (Yale) or in 1978 with a JD (Yale), you are still an equivalent lawyer. or Jwri7474 (talk) 12:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This program actually offers both for the same course(JD and LLB) Jwri7474 (talk) 13:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you are allowed to sit the NY Bar if you hold a BCL or LLB without having to complete additional education. Jwri7474 (talk) 01:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think this comment was added in response to recent edits. Please refer to the BBA talk section.  Yes, the NY Bar allows common law degree holders to sit for the bar exam, but it is the only jurisdiction in the U.S. to do so.  But in the UK and almost all other commonwealth countries, LL.B. graduates are required to take professional training courses (and usually a pupillage in addition) before being qualified to sit for the licensing exam.  This can be easily verified through citations in relevant wiki articles. Zoticogrillo (talk) 03:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

It depends on what country you are speaking about. A comparison of Curricula and Syllabi from LLB programs in Canada (e.g., University of Moncton and J.D. programs in the United States reveals that they are virtually identical. In contrast, LLB programs in the UK are markedly different.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.40.1.129 (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is true that there are some similarities between the degree requirements of the US JD and the Canadian LLB (or Canadian JD), however there are some subtle yet important differences. This is discussed by Reed in "Present-Day Law Schools in the United States and Canada," (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Bulletin 21, Boston: Merrymount Press. p. 390) as cited in the Juris Doctor article.  It states that the law program in Canada has had professional elements, but has traditionally also had elements of a liberal education (a common characteristic of LLB programs internationally).  For example, you will see in the degree requirements for Canadian law schools that they require a course in social/legal theory (the only exception I know of is Toronto), and a substantial academic research paper. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Professional bachelors equal to American "Professional Doctorates"
The example I gave is true: in medicine if you graduate with a "bachelor of medicine" and then become licensed to practice medicine in the US, every US state board of medicine allows you to use the title "MD" if you so wish to help reduce confusion. You are granted the exact same license and priviledges as any US-MD graduate.

The Bachelor of Medicine and the Doctor of Medicine degrees are truely equivalent qualifiations. The state boards of medicine in the United States state this. This also goes for the Bachelor of Dentistry and the Doctor of Dental Surgery or Dental Medicine, etc. Jwri7474 (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand why you would say so. On a professional level, both the MD and the MB could be considered equivalent in that they are both first professional degrees.
 * However, on an academic level they are not because the MD is a graduate degree, and the MB is an undergraduate degree. The MD requires a lot of science courses at the undergraduate level as a prerequisite, not to mention the liberal education required by the first degree.  The MD also receives more practical training.  In speaking to UK MB graduates who went to the States, it was not their opinion that the experiences are equivalent.
 * I would be interested to see the State Board statement. It would be useful for this article as well.  There are so few citations in this article, which I've been trying to remedy.
 * Your editing removed some information regarding the law degree, I think. I will try and go back and find a way to preserve both your content as well as mine.  Luckily with the history it's easy to fix things. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Who's opinion are you basing this information on that MBBS students recieved less training? Please show your sources. I'm not sure if you are aware, but there are 6 year MD programs for students out of High school in the US. Many Australian Universities have 7-8 year long combined BSc/MBBS programs for students out of High school too. Also, there are many MBBS programs in Australia or the UK that are "graduate-entry" meaning they are 4 year long and REQUIRE a previous bachelors for admission, and have the same curriculum as a US MD program. By the way.. "technically" speaking, the MD is also an "undergraduate medical degree" in North America as well. -> Example ... Wisconsin University MD program "considers applications from people without previous bachelors degrees". So it is not a hard and fast rule.

They are 100% equivalent medical degrees.

PHY-993 Use of the M. D. Title: The Wisconsin Medical Society: 1) defends the use of the M.D. title by physicians who graduated with an M.B.B.S. and are licensed to practice medicine in Wisconsin; and, 2) believes in clarifying Wisconsin statute so that International Medical Graduates licensed to practice as medical doctors can use the title M.D. (HOD,0495) Jwri7474 (talk) 09:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * An undergraduate degree is also unnecessary for a DD.S. However, both the M.D. and DD.S. are graduate and doctorate degrees.  Yes, professionally there is equivalency, but an graduate degree is not an undergraduate degree.
 * I have to duck out of researching whether a medical degree outside of the US has less practical training than in the US, I simply don't have the time. Sorry.
 * You're right, I didn't cite sources for saying that I thought that the MD required more practical training, but I didn't put that in the article. I've looked at your sources, and what they don't say is that the MD in the United States is an undergraduate degree, as you claim.  I don't see sources that say that a MBBS is a doctorate either.  I find it so odd that McMaster grants an undergraduate M.D.  As far as I know, it's an extremely unusual practice.  Don't they know what the D stands for?  It would be interesting to know the history of establishing that degree.  There are many sources that say that the M.D. is a professional doctorate, such as this one.  It's simply common knowledge.  Zoticogrillo (talk) 06:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The MBBS is not a doctorate, I never said it was.. but then again neither is the MD. (not a true doctorate like a PhD) The MBBS and MD are equivalent degrees in Medicine. I cited a source where the Wisconsin Medical Soceity states not only that they are equal, but also.. that when MBBS grads obtain their license to work in the US they are allowed to even use the "MD" title. It is possible for a professional program (MD, MBBS, DDS, etc) to be "undergraduate" and still be "graduate entry".. meaning requiring or prefering to admit students who already have a previous bachelors degree.

Here are more examples of medical programs:

Canadian: undergraduate MD undergraduate MD undergraduate MD

US: undergraduate MD undergraduate MD undergraduate MD undergraduate MD

Australia: MBBS program requires previous bachelors MBBS program requires previous bachelors MBBS program requires previous bachelors

Israel: undergraduate MD

All these medical programs regardless of what they call their degree or what they require for admissions are equal degrees in the field of Medicine. They teach the exact same things at the exact same level. Jwri7474 (talk) 12:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Zoticogrillo wrote:


 * "I understand why you would say so. On a professional level, both the MD and the MB could be considered equivalent in that they are both first professional degrees. However, on an academic level they are not because the MD is a graduate degree, and the MB is an undergraduate degree.  "


 * Not really. At least in Oxford and Cambridge, the MB/BChir are graduate-level bachelor's degrees. One typically finishes a standard 3-year (pre-clinical) undergraduate course leading to the regular Oxbridge BA and then applies for entry into a separate 3-year clinical course leading to the MB/BChir. It is actually possible to get a BA, let's say from Oxford, and then move on to complete your clinical studies at Cambridge or London for instance.161.24.19.112 (talk) 17:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Another comment from an academic:

I'd also like add that we can call FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREE HOLDERS (IE. "doctor" or "GOD") ANYTHING WE LIKE, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THESE DEGREES ARE NOT THE MOST ADVANCED ("terminal") IN THEIR FIELDS. I remember one of my collegues in the search committee whispering in my ear while interviewing a job candidate (with a professional degree, who prefered to be addressed as "DOC X") for a temporary teaching position "She's not a real f**king doctor", implying that she's not one of the "true" doctorates (Ph.D.s). Almost everyone in academia knows this: the PhDs (and their equivalents inclduing the advanced professional degree holders) are the ones that teach the professional "doctorates" at the universities. The reverve is dramatically less true, if not impossible.


 * Yes, you Ph.D.s do think highly of yourselves, we all know this.
 * There are professional doctorates which are the highest degree of their type in their field, such as the J.D. There is no higher professional degree in law than the doctorate.  In many professional schools, it is not the Ph.D.s who teach professional doctorates, but other holders of professional doctorates.  It is rare, for example, to see a law professor in the United States with any degree "higher" than a J.D.  The same is often true of dental schools as well.  It seems that perhaps you have forgotten that the first university degrees were professional degrees, and that the M.D. predates the Ph.D. in the United States by many decades.  In fact, when the Ph.D. was introduced in the U.S. there was considerable opposition to it, even through the 1950's.  You should be an expert on researching before opening your mouth--so act like it.  Good for you, you have a thesis gathering dust on a library shelf somewhere, I'm sure your divine credential is well deserved (but only if you defend a monopoly on its use, it seems).  It was wise not to sign your statement. Zoticogrillo (talk) 23:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * At our institution, a major medical and research center, maybe 5% of the teachers are PhDs. As the MD is the terminal degree in medicine in the US, that makes sense, and PhDs mostly teach only 1 or two courses in 1st year basic sciences. Fuzbaby (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * At most "reputable" medical schools in the US, there are 2 separate departments: research and clinical.  The research and ADVANCED science courses generally are taught by Ph.D and MD/PhD holders.  The clinical department's taught mostly by MDs who (almost always) do not teach (or are qualified, due to their lack of advanced science training) science courses. Typical MDs can barely read the Science journals in this field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.41.139 (talk) 10:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * So many Ph.D.s are insufferable teachers, particularly in professional schools. Zoticogrillo (talk) 03:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The PhD professors are more qualified to teach the BASIC sciences (no advanced science courses are offered at my medical school) so long as the topic doesn't deviate from that one particular subject (e.g. biochem professors keep it strictly biochem). As soon as another topic is blended with one of the basic science courses, the physicians take over the lectures, because the the PhD professors are ONLY experts in their fields and thus, cannot comment on the concerns of blended disciplines like a physician, who is an expert on how these areas play together.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.209.172.95 (talk) 20:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Verifiability
Please remember the wikipedia fundamental that every article must contain "verifiable" back-up for claims made in the article (see Verifiability). This article will soon be revised according to this rule. Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

First the MD does not allow one to become licensed to practice medicine. One must alsoFurrball2 (talk) 03:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC) pass the United States Medical Licensing Exam Steps I through III and complete one year of post-graduate training -- internship. The primary care specialties; Family Practice, Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Pediatrics; require three years of post-graduate training -- with research minimal requirements -- and one must sit for the board exam of their specific specialty.

Second, the MD degree does qualify an individual -- in the United States -- to run a research lab, apply for NIH and NSF grants, to be a department chair in a basic sciences department, to become a university president, and yes to train graduate students working towards their PhDs and master's degrees. Having earned both MS and MD degrees, I am well aware of the differences between the MD and PhD, but I am also well aware of how little that really means when it comes to tenure and grant money. Frequently it is much easier for the MD to get both.

Credential inflation citation
This citation has been removed because it is POV that contradicts other more credible sources. Zoticogrillo (talk) 08:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That information is very relevant. A good source on aspects of it is given here: Talk:First_professional_degree. JJL (talk) 12:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that the concern with credential inflation is relevant, however the source is not a good one. There are other sources that discuss credential inflation in a more objective manner.  This article from the same field of study discusses this issue (I've already used that citation, but I don't have time to find another). Zoticogrillo (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

sources for new edits
I have removed POV content that is not verifiable and will continue to revise. Here are some sources which contradict the old content.

The J.D. is a graduate degree

UC Berkeley general catalog lists the graduate degrees offered at Berkeley. The list includes the J.D. and states that "The J.D. (Juris Doctor) is the basic law degree. It is a graduate degree." 

The USC catalog includes the J.D. under its list of graduate degrees

University of Melbourne JD degree site, states that the JD is "a fully graduate law degree"

A J.D. is a professional doctorate

Association of American Universities Data Exchange, Glossary of Terms for Graduate Education, page 9.

Time to Degree of U.S. Research Doctorate Recipients, NSF 06-312, March 2006. Under "Data notes" mentions that the J.D. is a professional doctorate.

under “other references” and differences between academic and professional doctorate, and statement that the J.D. is a professional doctorate

The J.D. degree is listed under doctorate degrees.

The J.D. is distinguished from a research doctorate as a professional degree, and is also classified by some as a first professional degree.

There is such a thing as a professional doctorate, it is different than a research doctorate, and comparing it to a research doctorate is not valid. Task Force on the Professional Doctorate, Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (June 2006), page 8

Department of Education article about first professional degrees

Definition of a research doctorate, as opposed to a professional doctorate, such as a M.D., DD.S., etc.: "A research doctorate is any doctoral degree that (1) requires the completion of a dissertation or equivalent project of original work ( e.g., musical composition) and (2) is not exclusively intended as a degree for the practice of a profession." Lori Thurgood, et al., U.S. Doctorates in the 20th Century, National Science Foundation, June 2006 (117).

Creation of the J.D.

James Parker Hall, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Dec., 1907), pp. 112-117. Commentary by James Parker Hall of University of Chicago (who was the dean when the UofCh was the first law school to offer a J.D. exclusively) on the process of creating the J.D. degree, and extant degrees at the time (1907). The J.D. was established as the equivalent of the J.U.D. in Germany to reflect the advanced study required to be an effective lawyer. It was not a conversion of the LL.B. degree, but a graduate degree to be distinguished from undergraduate programs. The J.D. was established by the faculty of law at Harvard for this purpose, and while it was pending the approval of the administration, the degree was introduced at all the best law schools in the nations, such as Stanford, Pennsylvania, and Berkeley. Subsequently, other law schools tried to also implement the degree in order to boost the prestige of their universities, but the programs did not meet the rigorous standards of those at the better law schools.

[http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=PEVayHaV4XYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=history+of+legal+education&ots=AszgnpjJuy&sig=KF4jCw63Gr3fftEOFjT5X5QcccM#PPA16,M1 Albert James Harno. Legal Education in the United States. Lawbook Exchange, NJ 2004.] Historically legal education in the United States has taken inspiration from the approach suggested by the famous Judge Blackstone of England. This approach emphasized the importance in legal training of a foundation of broad liberal education in history and philosophy. Legal skills would later be learned in an apprenticeship. However, most law schools in the 19th century did not require any post-secondary education before pursuing legal studies. As a result, these undergraduate programs mixed much theoretical study with their curriculum (16). However, Professor Langdell at Harvard took upon himself the calling of improving legal education in the United States, and proposed that students should start the study of law as a graduate degree. This would allow students to dedicate intensive study of the logic and application of the law through his case and socratic methods. Therefore, a graduate law degree was established, the Juris Doctor, using the case and socratic methods as its didactic approach (50).

[http://www.arc.miami.edu/people/LLB%20to%20JD%20for%20school%20website.pdf Schoenfeld, Marcus. 1963. "J.D. or LL.B as the Basic Law Degree," Cleveland-Marshall Law Review. Vol. 4. 573-579.) quoted in Joanna Lombard. LL.B. to J.D. and the Professional Degree in Architecture. Proceedings of the 85th ACSA Annual Meeting, Architecture: Material and Imagined and Technology Conference, 1997. pp. 585-591.] Marcus Schoenfeld, a law professor in the 1960’s, studied the history of the creation of the Juris Doctor, and compared this degree to that of the LL.B. and other graduate degrees, such as a masters degree.  He concluded that “the first degree in law should be a Doctorate simply because the very high level of achievement over three years is not sufficiently rewarded by a Mastership” (579).  This is evidence that the J.D. has met the goals of Professor Langdell in his establishment of a rigorous graduate law degree.

Also see the citations in the section of this talk page "J.D. and LL.B. comparison." Zoticogrillo (talk) 08:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Calling the American J.D. "more rigorous" than alternative Law degrees in other jurisdictions is subjective POV. Oxford University for example claims on the contrary that its one-year master's degree, called "Bachelor of Civil Law", has a "higher standard" than that "required of a first law degree such as BA, LLB or JD", see . Note that Oxford also equates the JD to the undergraduate LLB in the previous statement.


 * Of course, Oxford's position, which is representative of the commonly held POV in the UK, is also debatable. The relevant question however is not whether Professor Schoenfeld is right or wrong in his claim that the amount of work in a J.D. course merits a doctorate or not. The issue on this talk page is instead that several Wiki articles edited by contributor Zoticogrillo present one point of view on the validity of the J.D as a doctorate as if that were an universally held/accepted opinion, ignoring multiple evidences to the contrary.


 * To restore neutrality and reach a compromise, sentences like "the J.D. is a first professional degree and a professional doctorate" should be rewritten as "the J.D. is a first professional degree, sometimes also referred to as professional doctorate in the United States." 161.24.19.112 (talk) 17:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Doesn't it strike you as odd that that Oxford program requires another university degree before entry, contrary to other programs in the UK, and that it is still termed a bachelor's? Perhaps it's more reasonable to acknowledge that the degree exists as such for historical reasons.  The website (which is not an academic journal article or a policy statement) does not state that the J.D. is not a doctorate, nor does it state that the LL.B. is the same as the J.D.  However, there are many credible sources which state that "the J.D. is a first professional degree and a professional doctorate."  I vote that we follow the sources. Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

changing of name from MB or LLB to MD or JD
There are no citations for the POV that the creation of the MD and JD degree (indeed, all professional doctorates) was from a mere changing of the name of their undergraduate counterparts. There are able sources, some of which have been cited recently, which clearly explain that the creation of professional doctorates was a complete divergence from the previous didactical system from which the undergraduate degrees arose. As the citations state, there was a concern for the quality of the education of these professionals, and therefore a more rigorous and concentrated program was created (for example). Also as these citations state, the undergraduate programs contained a lot of theory and philosophy, or liberal arts (such as here). Therefore, by requiring an undergraduate degree for these new intense professional programs, the full time of the student could be spent in acquiring professional skills. Assuming that academics in the United States were simple minded enough to merely change the name of their degrees and fabricate a "doctorate" is really biased and has no support. There are fundamental differences between the undergraduate and graduate professional degrees (such as the LLB and JD). The citations for this are plentiful, but for now just one or two will do, because no citations for the alternative POV have been offered. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually many articles have been written about how Canada is now changing their LLB programs to JD mainly because Canadian graduates are working in the US and being offered less money than someone with a JD simply because of the title of the degree even though both programs (Canadian LLB and US JD) require a previous bachelors for admission and have almost identical curriculum. Not to mention that Universities can CHARGE MORE for a degree that is titled a doctorate than a bachelors. America is the world's center of capatalism (ie. when in doubt.. follow for the money trail for your motivation).,,. This is the same reasoning that has been implicated in the change from the once American BSPT (bachelor of Physical therapy) to then a MSPT and finally now the DPT. Are the DPT graduates REALLY that better trained and is the program THAT much harder? Or.. do you think that professional politics and money are the real reason for the change. Obviously the universities can charge more for the DPT than the BSPT or MSPT degree. Also, with many chiropractors trying to market themselves as "sports medicine" specialists and fringing on the border of practicing Physical therapy. The PTs now want fight back. So they now prefer to ALSO have a "doctorate" and be called Dr. too.. in the hopes of being able to practice without MD referrals and able to fight off the DC (chiros) and also make more money along the way. ... and of course, who doesn't prefer to be called "doctor". :) Jwri7474 (talk) 11:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I have a question. How do you explain the medical, dental, law, etc programs in Canada and Australia that REQUIRE a previous bachelors degree (exactly like the MD, DDS, and JD and have identical curriculums), but continue to call them "bachelors"?

First professional degrees are just that. The "first" degree you can obtain in a particular subject. They are "entry level" courses (this includes the MD and DDS) and should technically by definition be a "bachelor".. Just because you have a previous degree in "biology or chemistry" doesn't mean you have already have a basic education in "medicine or dentistry" as these are technically different fields of study in different university faculties. When you enter into studying the entry-level, basic dental or basic medical degree (BDS, MBBS, MD, DDS, etc) you study this for the very first time. By the way.. they changed to the MD and DDS titles in the United States way before the requirement for a previous degree anyways. People were graduating from dental school with a DDS degree in the late 1800s and early 1900s in the USA after only 2-3 years of study out of High School. So, I hightly doubt that the reason was because the American programs were that much more challenging or taught at a higher level than the British programs. The English and commonwealth universities have simply chosen to retain the more traditional bachelor title for first professional degrees. Remember America fought for independance from England and their system, so finally.. the US may change also just to be different. :) Jwri7474 (talk) 12:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Nonetheless, even the JDs in Canada will continue to require a traineeship before becoming fully qualified as an attorney, which is not required in the US. Because JDs in the US are different in their curriculum and their focus than those first degrees in Canada, so there is no traineeship or apprenticeship requirement in the US for becoming fully licensed.  First degrees in law outside of the US includes a great deal of study of the theory of law, which is not addressed in the US programs.  You can see from the articles I sighted, one of which was written in 1907 by one of the individuals who helped create the JD degree, that the goal of the creators was to make a program which was much more challenging than what was previously offered.  Feel free to read that article--it is interesting.  I wonder what you think about the fact that even though a JD has been required to be an attorney in the US for many years, and yet US attorneys do not wish to use the title of Dr. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that is interesting. To some extint however, law by nature is different from country to country as laws and the legal systems are different. This doesn't really apply to all professions. (ie. you can't say that just because medical education in Germany, US, and Italy grant the doctor of medicine degree... medicine is taught at a higher level or that it is more challenging than medical schools in England and Australia because they grant the bachelor of medicine degree). But in regards to law, maybe.. It would be nice to have some input from someone who is currently enrolled in either a Canadian or Australian law program though. Jwri7474 (talk) 11:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * One would have to find someone who has attended or has personal knowledge of both the Australian system and the US system. One can compare the course lists found on the websites of the Canadian and Australian law schools and those of the US schools.  You will notice that it is rare to find Canadian and Australian schools with many clinics, while most US schools have numerous each.  You also won't see many contract drafting, trial advocacy or client communication seminars in Australian or Canadian schools.  Their system is different, as described in one of the articles I cited: they emphasise theory and liberal education, while US schools assume that knowledge from the BA and concentrate on professional skills.  I have spoken with UK and Australian medical graduates, and they do generally believe that the US programs are more rigorous.  The same comparisons of curriculum could be done.  However, it should also be kept in mind that as a young student spends more time in university, that student's faculties and capacities grow at a fast rate.  Therefore, students who have spent more time in university might be more capable of more intense studies than those younger ones.  This is reason for the general requirement of most medical programs in the US that the student already have a first degree.  I don't understand how one could say that students who have spent seven to eight years in school have the same educational level as others who have only spent three to five years in school. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I am sorry to burst your American bubble but it is because Australian and British students specialise earlier in their studies. US degrees are certainly not more rigorous. In the UK when a person studies for a degree he focuses only on that subject - not a broad base of subjects. A BSc degree in maths would have modules in maths and nothing else, unlike US universities which require students to satisfy general education requirements. 90.212.93.60 (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree, it would be nice to have someone who has experienced the legal system in both countries to comment on this article. Regarding the medical programs. Again, the Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery MBBS program at the Australian programs I cited earlier are 4 year programs which require graduates to already have a bachelors degree. So, Yes.. they would have been in University for 7-8 years. University of Sydney does have an accelerated option also (7-years total) of combining a Bachelor of Science with a MBBS med degree. Doctors in both countries regardless need to know the same material and be able to treat patients the same. Again... the legal system is different. apples and oranges.. can't really compare the two.Jwri7474 (talk) 12:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Calling a first-professional degree a "doctorate" does not make it a doctorate. In Italy, all college graduates are called "dottori". Nevertheless, no one would claim Italian universities award doctoral degrees only.


 * Zoticogrillo's argument that the change from LLB or MB to JD or MD was motivated by the fact that the latter are graduate-entry degrees whereas the former are not is also questionable given that the MB/BChir in Commonwealth universities may be also offered as a graduate degree, see for example this reference from the Imperial College London's website. Likewise, a few British universities like Oxford still award graduate bachelor's degrees such as the degree of Bachelor of Civil Law, which is ranked as a master's degree in the university's academic order of precedence.


 * In other words, "graduate-entry" is not a sufficient reason to change the name of a degree from "bachelor" to "doctor". 200.168.20.12 (talk) 10:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Pre-reqs for first professional degrees?
Out of curiosity, I thought that pre-reqs were required (i.e. a prior period of university/academic study, even a full degree) to be admitted into first professional degree programs. For example, one can't just "jump into" veterinary medicine, first you have to obtain a BSc and then apply. It seems like our list here as some stuff which appears to be the first and ONLY degree required to obtain a 'designation' or licensing. Does anyone know the bottom line? CorticoSpinal 208.101.118.196 (talk) 20:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

MEng in the US and the UK
The article should note that, while the MENg is normally a graduate professional master's degree in the US, it is nonetheless a first undergraduate professional degree in the UK that has largely replaced the older BEng degree in most top universities. A graduate master's degree in engineering in the UK is normally called an MSc or an MPhil, while the research doctoral degree is called a PhD (like in the US) or, more rarely, a DPhil. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I missed this statement and skipped right to the EngD commentary below, but I agree. MEng (first professional degree) in the UK is different from the North American MEng (graduate professional degree) counterpart.156.34.234.187 (talk) 01:57, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

In addition the article cites incorporated engineer as a listed title. It should be noted that the UK Incorporated Engineer is equivalent to the North American Technologist title, not the Professional Engineer title and is not awarded the same benefits of the Chartered Engineer. Please refer to the Sydney Accord vs the Washington Accord for more details. Also Incorporated and Chartered Engineer titles are professional credentials (Similar to the PE, PEng,.ing), not first professional degrees and should not be part of this article.156.34.234.187 (talk) 02:14, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

BBA
The BBA degree is an entry level professional degree in the field of business even in the United States. Even if we aren't discussing the U.S., the BBA is considered a professional degree in other countries as well. To delete this because it may not be true in the US would be against wiki POV for creating an article that is too US centric. Just because something may or may not be true in one country doesn't mean that it is universally untrue. Jwri7474 (talk) 05:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * First of all, "business" or "business administration" is NOT a profession. Professional degrees are typically necessary for the practice of a particular profession.  Business or business administration is not a "profession" and a BBA confers no specific privilege. You said, "...degree in the field of business...".  From your understanding and/or knowledge, define the field of business.  The BBA curriculum consists of several majors/concentrations in the area of business administration such as accounting, finance, marketing, management, etc.  Students select one or two area of concentrations/majors within the BBA degree.  Therefore, a graduate of a BBA becomes either an accountant (accounting), auditor (accounting), financial analyst (accounting/finance), investment banker (finance), account manager (marketing), human resources generalist (management).  These people are colloquially referred to as businessmen or businesswomen.  A professional business degree would be a Master of Accountancy, Master of Science in Taxation or Master of Science in Finance because these curriculum focuses on one area in depth.  I can expand this further if you are not clear on what business administration is and what is and is not a profession/professional degree.  &mdash;RJN (talk) 05:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I have a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Accounting and work as an internal auditor (accounting/auditing profession). In the accounting and finance profession, it is not a professional degree. In the United States, a BBA in accounting does not provide enough depth for accountancy or any other business administration areas. A BBA in the U.S. requires only 120 hours to graduate. In order for one to sit for the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) exam, most states require 150 college hours and at least 30 upper-level advanced accounting hours. Most BBA in accounting or other business concentrations (i.e. finance, marketing, management, etc.) only require 12-24 hours of course work in the major/concentration area (depending on the university and program). The BBA and MBA degrees are general business degrees that expose students to various business areas (accounting, finance, marketing, management, etc.) in addition to declaring one or two areas to major in. In order for one to qualify to sit for the CPA exam, the majority of the people pursue the Master of Accountancy (professional degree) for in depth studies in accountancy and finance beyond the general coverage of the BBA degree. &mdash; RJN (talk) 07:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Great info. I think it would add considerable clarity and depth to the article.  But it can't be used in wikipedia unless you cite it.  Citations allow people to find more information on a topic, and helps to maintain accuracy.  It's not because we don't believe you.  Please read this article, add citations, then add your content to the article. Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that RJN needs to provide verifiable citations for the assertions being made. I think that for accountants in the U.S. a BA in business serves the same role as the LL.B. does for lawyers in the U.K.  That is, the degree is insufficient education to enter the profession, as additional courses are required.  Therefore, if we are to include the LL.B., we should include the B.A. in business.  However, the article should clarify that the LL.B. in most common law countries is insufficient education to enter the profession.  If we are to exclude the B.A. in business, then we should exclude the LL.B. for the same reason. Zoticogrillo (talk) 06:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If it is untrue in one academic system (or country) and not another, the article should make the distinction. It is relevant, would enrich the article, and inform the readers in an important way.  I disagree with the idea that this article try and universally or generally define degrees, because degrees differ so greatly between academic systems, and therefore the attempt is logically flawed.  The article would be considerably improved in distinguishing among academic systems when differences exist. Zoticogrillo (talk) 06:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I've said this about the MBA before, and I'll say it again. It is not REQUIRED in order to practice a profession. Therefore, it is NOT a professional degree. Neither is a BBA. The analogy comparing a BBA to an LLB is off base. The LLB is necessary (along with additional coursework, as necessary) to practice LAW. The CPA, on the other hand, requires a minimum of 150 credit hours and certain coursework. What it does not require is a particular degree. How a person structures their education doesn't matter. They could have a B.A., B.S., nursing degree, whatever, so long as they have enough hours and the right courses. This is because undergraduate business education is not uniform, and so it is simpler (and more educationally effective for accountants, for instance) to define the requirements explicitly rather than as a broad degree requirement. For reference, I have a B.Comm from a commonwealth university, am qualified as a Chartered Accountant, and hold a J.D. degree from a U.S. university. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stlcanuck (talk • contribs) 19:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * While it's true that the CPA does not specify a certain degree, in completing the courses required to take the exam one would concurrently complete all the courses required for a B.A. in business at most institutions, plus some. Although a B.A. in business is not specified, the course requirements in effect are the same as requiring such a degree. Zoticogrillo (talk) 23:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

What is after MD?
If MD is a first professional degree, what do professors of medicine have? The JD graduate goes on to LL.M and LL.D, but what does MD go to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.12.93 (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There are degrees like this: List_of_Master%27s_degrees_in_North_America. Here's an example that's open to MDs: . JJL (talk) 14:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not required for a professor of law to have anything more than a J.D., and in fact very few of them do. A LL.D. is an honorary degree.  The doctorate research degree is the S.J.D., and it is exceedingly rare for professors to hold this degree. Zoticogrillo (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * American MD's can also earn a research doctorate (e.g. a PhD degree) provided that they complete and successfully defend a doctoral dissertation. Several medical schools in the US actually offer joint MD/PhD programs with a formal research component in addition to the regular MD professional/clinical training.


 * In the UK, MB/BChir's are also able to earn a PhD by intercalating 3 years of research between the first and second years of their clinical course. In addition, the MD is also available in the UK as a higher doctorate, based on the recognition of major contributions to medical research and not to be confused with its U.S counterpart. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 17:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

In the US, the MD degree is the terminal degree. Medical doctors may get additional degrees, but none of them expand upon their ability to practice medicine. Additionally, only MD degree holders are considered to practice medicine. Many physicians in the United States also have Master's degrees or PhDs, in fact some before getting their MD degrees, however these degrees are to give an additional level of knowledge in a specific area and do not grant additional professional abilities or rights. Fuzbaby (talk) 02:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

To User Fuzbaby, that is not entirely true. Yes, most US medical (MD) graduates do not obtain a postgraduate medical degree.. However, every MD graduate is required to obtain some "graduate medical education". The US MD (or any medical degree for that matter) is considered "undergraduate medical education", and "postgraduate medical education" is further training in any specific field of medicine. That can be either in the form of residency training, research training, or other such program. Master's degrees in specific fields of medicine which are only available to applicants who have obtained a medical degree (MD/MBBS, etc) are more common in UK (commonwealth) training systems... however, even in the United States there are "some" Masters degrees only for MD's so that they can obtain further training in a specific field. (example: This guy got his MSc in Otolaryngology from the University of Iowa, and this MSc available at McGill). So, to say that the MD is the both the entry level/lowest and at the same time the highest/terminal degree one can possibly earn in Medicine in the United States I feel is not really true. Jwri7474 (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Harvard as well as a fwe others offer advanced degrees in Medicine and Dentistry (see their DSMC degrees)!

Should the British EngD be mentioned in the article as a "professional doctorate" ?
A few English universities now offer the degree of "Doctor of Engineering" (EngD), which, like the PhD, is also a research-based degree, but differs from the traditional UK PhD in several important ways. Specifically,


 * 1) A PhD degree is normally pursued full-time by a student while in residence in a university department working under the supervision of a faculty member. Accordingly, PhD-level research is more speculative/abstract in nature, with an emphasis on producing results that may be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and are of academic interest.


 * 2) The EngD on the other hand is normally pursued by a candidate while he/she works as an employee in an outside company. Most EngD research is carried out in a designated industry (as opposed to a university department or lab) and is jointly supervised by both an industrial and a university supervisor. Accordingly, EngD-level research tends to be application-oriented in nature and designed to meet the specific needs/interests of the industrial sponsor. EngD candidates are still required to produce original research that makes a significant contribution to existing knowledge in his/her field, but, in many programmes (AmEng "programs"), it is customary for EngD candidates to submit a portfolio of engineering projects in lieu of a longer monographic thesis to fulfil (AmEng "fulfill") the requirements for the degree.


 * 3) EngD programmes normally include a more formal coursework requirement than the traditional English PhD. It should be stressed however that many engineering departments in the UK (e.g. at Cambridge) now require that PhD students take lecture courses and their associated written exams in their first year in the programme.


 * 4) (POV) No matter what the Research Councils say, the EngD is still generally seen in academic circles as inferior to a PhD. For example, I doubt an EngD would be acceptable as a qualification for appointment as a Lecturer in a university, whereas the PhD of course is the standard qualification in England for an entry-level faculty position.

Because of its industry-oriented nature, the EngD is normally referred to in English academic circles as a "professional degree", even though it remains a research degree as emphasized above (there are no "professional doctorates" awarded in the UK by coursework only like the American J.D for example). 161.24.19.112 (talk) 12:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting comment, although not directly related but to further the conversation the requirements to enter the profession of engineering varies from country to country. For example, I am a practicing professional engineer in Canada. Entry into the profession in Canada requires an undergraduate degree in engineering, usually a (4-5 year) Bachelor of Science in Engineering, Bachelor of Engineering, or Bachelor of Applied Science in Engineering, along with 4 years of supervised practice, some exams and some statement to follow a code of ethics. This process results in the P.Eng designation and license to practice. This process is similar in the US with the PE designation, Quebec with the .ing designation, and in other countries like the UK as the Chartered Engineer (CEng) as identified by the Washington Accord. How my comments relate to the EngD conversation above, is that like the EngD in the UK; in Canada, many engineers have opted to pursue graduate studies to become more competitive resulting in the creation of MEng programs at many universities. These degrees are separate from traditional Masters of Science in Engineering programs in that they follow a more course based professional degree program format in lieu of the research thesis requirements of the Masters of Science. Therefore these programs also fall lower on the academic ranking than their research based counterparts. Speculatory commentary can point to these masters level degrees becoming the defacto standard of entry into the profession, but either way it is important to note that at the current time, neither are required for entry into the profession. Only the bachelor level degree (for North America, Masters for UK) is required to practice professional engineering and continue the pursuit of professional licensing. 156.34.234.187 (talk) 01:39, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Geologist
I have readded Geologist with citations, as requested in the undo edit summary. Geology is a regulated profession in most states in the U.S. For example, within the State of Nebraska, the Geologists Regulation Act, Revised Statutes of Nebraska, 1943, §§ 81-3501-3541, 2004. (located at http://www.geology.state.ne.us/pdf/geo-reg-act.pdf and http://www.unicam.state.ne.us/laws/browse-chapters.php?chapter=81) defines in §§ 81-3502 Section 81-3502. Geology; regulation; prohibited acts. In order to safeguard life, health, and property and to promote the public welfare, the profession of geology is declared to be subject to regulation in the public interest. It is unlawful for any person to (1) practice or offer to practice geology in this state, (2) use in connection with his or her name or otherwise assume the title professional geologist, or (3) advertise any title or description tending to convey the impression that he or she is a licensed geologist, unless the person is duly licensed or exempt from licensure under the Geologists Regulation Act. The practice of geology and use of the title geologist is a privilege granted by the state. Other U.S. states that regulate Geology include (but are not limited to) those listed on the National Association of State Boards of Geology (ASBOG®) website (located at http://www.asbog.org/) There is a map of the states (located here: http://www.asbog.org/map/asbogmap08.pdf) if you'd rather not go through the entire list. Finally, the main article itself, in the second sentence, states that "These professions are typically licensed or otherwise regulated by a governmental or government-approved body." As such, I argue for the inclusion of Geologists on the list of professionals.
 * I see evidence that people can be licensed as geologists, but not that a B.S. in geology is itself is a professional degree (intended specifically to prepare a person for such licensure). Essentially all engineering degrees conform to ABET standards, but most physics degrees don't prepare a person to be a licensed health physicist. Geology is usually a liberal arts degree at most schools and rarely in a separate, professional school. I'm not convinced by this that the degree is a professional degree. Is the degree required for licensure in most states? JJL (talk) 15:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You're correct in that it's not typically a separate school. However, for more than half the states in the U.S. (plus Puerto Rico) a BS or BA is required for licensing as a geologist. This can be verified here: http://www.asbog.org/matrix/08%20AnMtgBk%20reg_matrix.xls.pdf Some states do not require an actual degree in geology, however they typically require 30 semester hours of geology courses -- usually enough for a major. A quick reference can be found here: http://www.accesskansas.org/ksbtp/geoxam.pdf (see page 14). Also, see http://www.asbog.org/member.htm for a table of the 50 states. The Association of Environmental and Engineering Geologists also has a list of states that regulate Geology as a profession, located here: http://www.aegweb.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3695 The American Institute of Professional Geologists also has a list of state regulatory boards here: http://www.aipg.org/scriptcontent/custom/anonymous.cfm?PAGE=/aboutAIPG/aipginfo.htm#Registration Note, most states do regulate the practice, not just the title. As for the degree preparing people for such licensure, I would argue that it does. Just because someone gets a degree in geology doesn't mean they have to become licensed, just as an attorney does not have to take the Bar Exam. The same goes for those with degrees in accounting and engineering. Granting the degree does not guarantee professional licensure. However it is generally a prerequisite for it when advertising said services to the public.Tonytnnt (talk) 06:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of Canada also regulates Geology when providing services to the public (found on the AEG website http://www.aegweb.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3695, which has contact information for the various groups.)Tonytnnt (talk) 06:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked at the licensing link and it listed a BA/BS in Geoscience as one way to fulfil the requirements. I still don't see a source indicating that a geology degree itself is a professional degree; that seems to be a WP:OR or at least WP:SYNTH conclusion, back-constructed from the fact that geologists can be licensed professionals. I'm inclined to remove Geology from the list until such a source is found. Perhaps we need another editor's opinion here! JJL (talk) 13:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I welcome other opinions on this matter. There's certainly no need to start an edit war over this. I'll abide by whatever consensus is reached in the talk section.Tonytnnt (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem as though other editors are going to weigh in on this, so I'm going to take it out of the article. If someone does post a response to this talk section thinking Geologist should be included, lets add it back in. Otherwise leave it out for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonytnnt (talk • contribs) 20:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Possibly excellent WP:RS for this subject
I stumbled on this article quite by chance and really am not versed in this subject but since this article has so many improvement tags I decided to do some non-WP research of my own. A quick Google search found this document published by the US government. I think (based on my understanding of US law) documents published by the government are public domain. If that is correct then editors could use much of this text verbatim to eliminate or reduce synthesis in this article. 66.102.204.115 (talk) 08:29, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Adding Interior Design
The BID and MID are the generally accepted degrees that signify educational achievement necessary to move forward in the licensing process. The National Council of Interior Design Qualifiers (NCIDQ) accepts degrees from institutions whose programs, http://www.accredit-id.org/accredited-programs are accredited by the Council for Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA). A CIDA accredited degree can be one of many, BID, BSID, BFA-ID, BS, BA, MID, MAID, MSID, MFA-ID, MS MA. While many degrees can be first professional, in that they are accredited, Non accredited degrees can be accepted by NCIDQ after a detailed audit. The BID and MID are the both exclusive to accreditation, and the intent of the BID MID is to assure first professional recognition. This is very similar to the BArch and MArch degrees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.0.65.213 (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

First professional degrees versus research doctorates in the U.S.
A previous edit to this page included a long list of first professional degrees. Unfortunately, this list contained many inaccuracies (for example, listing the Doctor of Business Education (D.B.A.) and Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) as first professional degrees--which they are not. Many of the bachelors and masters degrees listed were also not first professional degrees, as they are not considered to be required for entry into a specific profession.  For instance, neither a bachelor's degree in education nor a masters degree in education is not required for entry into the profession of education.  I corrected the issue by renaming the section to reflect "First professional degrees versus research doctorates in the U.S." and providing the list of first professional degrees and research doctorates recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Science Foundation.  In my last sentence, I left it open for someone to add section(s) reflecting degrees outside the U.S.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrPina (talk • contribs) 17:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Article needs an overhaul
This article needs to be wiped and completely rewritten. All of the content is in the 14-paragraph 'introduction' except for a small list of degree types. Moreover, little content is cited, and the list of doctorate PhDs does not belong in this article.98.208.213.124 (talk) 12:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm in complete consensus. Currently, very little of this page has anything to do with first professional degrees and it's almost entirely original research, which seems to have been the case for years now. I'm going to change it to be in conformance with Wiki policy and the official definition of First professional degree and list only the 10 fields that first professional degrees were ever recognized to be in.--TDJankins (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)


 * This article has issues, but there are 8 sources listed and it attempts to take a global point of view. The lead is too essay-style but many of its statements are well-sourced. Wiping it is not the best approach--improving it is. Let's start by removing chaff from the WP:LEDE without throwing out the good with the bad (or merely indifferent). JJL (talk) 18:49, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Anglo-saxon slant
I understand this is En-Wikipedia, but any encyclopaedic article should aim at a minimum of universal flavor. If you mean the article header as capitalized (that is as a proper name for country-specific institutionalized type of academic/vocational diplomas) then it's fine to stick to that country and the 'surroundings' (that's countries with similar systems or systems with a common origin). If you mean the article header as a 'universal' or generic term for a type or level of higher education degrees, then you're missing out on a lot of other systems outside the US, Canada or UK. For one thing, you completely neglect 'the' country for vocational and professional higher education, France, where it was all invented, and whose engineering and field-specific schools form a most highly reputed and separate section of its university_level educational system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8AD5:C150:7556:F3C:7997:24FA (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I quite agree. Unfortunately most of the resources for French professional degrees are (unsurprisingly) in French, which makes it more difficult for me to work them into the article. If you are able to do this, please do! Robminchin (talk) 19:11, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

First Professional Degree. U.S. Department of Education Defined
There is much discussion and confusion about First Professional Degrees and Research Doctorate. The answer is simple and easily found. Under the Structure of Education in the United States, from the U.S. Department of Education.. Structure of the U.S. Education System: First-Professional Degrees

First-professional degrees represent a category of qualifications in professional subject areas that require students to have previously completed specified undergraduate coursework and/or degrees before enrolling. They are considered graduate-level programs in the U.S. system because the follow prior undergraduate studies, but they are in fact first degrees in these professional subjects. Holders of first-professional degrees are considered to have an entry-level qualification and may undertake graduate study in these professional fields following the award of the first-professional degree. '''Several of these degrees use the term “doctor” in the title, but these degrees do not contain an independent research component or require a dissertation (thesis) and should not be confused with PhD degrees or other research doctorates. ''' A first-professional degree is an award that requires completion of a program that meets all of the following criteria: (1) completion of the academic requirements to begin practice in the profession; (2) at least 2 years of college work prior to entering the program; and (3) a total of at least 6 academic years of college work to complete the degree program, including prior required college work plus the length of the professional program itself.

All first-professional degree programs are closely regulated by recognized professional and specialized accrediting agencies. See Accreditation and Quality Assurance.

FIRST-PROFESSIONAL DEGREE TITLES

First-professional degrees may be awarded in the following 10 fields:

Doctor of Chiropractic (D.C. or D.C.M.) Doctor of Dental Science (D.D.S.) or Doctor of Dental Medicine (D.M.D.) Doctor of Jurisprudence or Juris Doctor (J.D.) Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) Doctor of Optometry (O.D.) Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine/Osteopathy (D.O.) Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm.D.) Doctor of Podiatric Medicine/Podiatry (D.P.M., D.P., or Pod.D.) Master of Divinity (M.Div.), Master of Hebrew Letters (M.H.L.) or Rabbinical Ordination (Rav) Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (D.V.M.).

For graduate-level research degrees in these fields, consult the degree lists under Master’s Degrees and Research Doctorate Degrees.

Research Doctorate
Structure of the U.S. Education System: Research Doctorate Degrees

The research doctorate, or the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) and its equivalent titles, represents the highest academic qualification in the U.S. education system. While the structure of U.S. doctoral programs is more formal and complex than in some other systems, it is important to note that the research doctorate is not awarded for the preliminary advanced study that leads to doctoral candidacy, but rather for successfully completing and defending the independent research presented in the form of the doctoral dissertation (thesis).

RESEARCH DOCTORATE DESCRIPTION

U.S. doctorates are structured programs of advanced study and supervised research. Students admitted to doctoral programs must complete all qualifying graduate-level coursework and participate in doctoral seminars and colloquia. No coursework is credited toward the doctoral program unless it is doctoral-level and part of the research seminar and colloquia preparation for advancement to candidacy. Students who complete these preliminary requirements at a satisfactory level (usually an A average grade is required) must then pass written comprehensive examinations that cover their chosen research specialization plus two or more adjunct specialties, one of which is often in a related subject area. Successful students who pass the examinations and receive the recommendation of the doctoral faculty are advanced to candidacy for the doctorate.

Some U.S. graduate students’ transcripts may show that undergraduate courses were completed in subjects such as languages, quantitative methods or a second subject, particularly if the student entered pre-doctoral studies from the bachelor’s degree level, is undertaking interdisciplinary studies, or is changing subjects. It is important to know, however, that U.S. accreditation rules do not allow such undergraduate credit to be counted toward graduate studies. Only if undergraduate courses are taken for graduate credit – requiring additional work – and are certified as such by the graduate faculty will an award of credit be considered.

The doctoral candidate selects a doctoral dissertation advisor and doctoral committee (usually 2-5 senior faculty, frequently with at least one member from another subject area or university). The advisor and committee approve the dissertation research proposal and are available to advise on the progress of the independent research program. When the candidate and the advisor judge that the research is completed and the dissertation is finished, the candidate is scheduled for a public oral examination defending the dissertation. At the conclusion of the oral defense, the dissertation committee votes on whether to award the doctorate and sign the dissertation, which is then published via university printing services and made available electronically for the academic community. Many dissertations are later revised, edited, and published commercially as academic monographs.

Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED) is a comprehensive longitudinal study of all recipients of U.S. research doctorates, from 1954 to the present, managed by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Survey of Doctorate Recipients (SDR) is a follow-up survey of holders of U.S. research doctorates that gathers data on their career progress until age 76.

Time to Degree of U.S. Research Doctorate Recipients is an NSF study of how long it takes U.S. and international students to finish U.S. doctoral studies.

PhD Completion Project is the Council of Graduate School’s longitudinal study of doctoral student attrition and degree completion.

Research Doctorate Programs is the National Research Council’s current study assessing the quality of U.S. research doctorate programs.

RESEARCH DOCTORATE DEGREE TITLES

NOTE: This is the list of frequently awarded research doctorate degree titles accepted by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as representing degrees equivalent in content and level to the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree.

Doctor of Arts (D.A.) Doctor of Business Administration (D.B.A.) Doctor of Church Music (D.C.M.) Doctor of Canon Law (J.C.D./D.C.L.) Doctor of Design (D.Des.) Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) Doctor of Engineering (D.Eng./D.E.Sc./D.E.S.) Doctor of Fine Arts (D.F.A.) Doctor of Hebrew Letters (D.H.L.) Doctor of Industrial Technology (D.I.T.) Doctor of Juridical Science (J.S.D./S.J.D.) Doctor of Music (D.M.) Doctor of Musical/Music Arts (D.M.A.) Doctor of Music Education (D.M.E.) Doctor of Modern Languages (D.M.L.) Doctor of Nursing Science (D.N.Sc.) Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) Doctor of Public Administration (D.P.A.) Doctor of Physical Education (D.P.E.) Doctor of Public Health (D.P.H.) Doctor of Sacred Theology (S.T.D.) Doctor of Science (D.Sc./Sc.D.) Doctor of Social Work (D.S.W.) Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.241.239 (talk) 04:27, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

First Medical Schools
Currently Penn, Columbia, Harvard, and Maryland are listed as the first medical schools in the US offering the bachelors of medicine degree. I believe Dartmouth predates Maryland however (1797 vs 1808). Could someone more knowledgeable than me verify this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.219.255.239 (talk) 11:11, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on First professional degree. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.arc.miami.edu/people/LLB%20to%20JD%20for%20school%20website.pdf
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080216111845/http://wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/_WMS/legislation/_files/pdf/compendium/practice97-112.pdf to http://wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/_WMS/legislation/_files/pdf/compendium/practice97-112.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)