Ed School Stigma

[Gabrielle]

Hello all, I've been accepted into Harvard's Ed school for an Ed.M in Human Development & Psychology. I worked very hard to gain this acceptance with high GRE scores and great LORs. I've been reading some backlash about the school being thought of as a joke compared to other Harvard schools and not as prestigious because of its 50% acceptance rate...which I'm not sure where they got that number from because the official Harvard site does not list the acceptance rate. I've also read, "filled with gritty 30 year olds trying to change the field of education" or "relies more on professional experience than academics." While I know those are some harsh comments, I'm wondering if there is any remnant of truth to them? Any veritable insight is helpful. Thank you. 

[Cat Time]

Prestige can be a never ending cycle. I've  seen STEM students put down arts students as a whole, med students put down business students, business students put down law students, law students put down public policy students (I've  also seen Yale law students ridicule HLS students, most of whom didn't  get into Yale) , and policy students put down others, all based just on faculty/ school. Things can then be broken down within schools, with some people looking down on certain concentrations and programs, and then of course after graduation the focus shifts to job prestige.

I think it's true that education isnt generally  considered  as  prestigious as some other areas, but HGSE is a great school and the people who are going to look down on it probably aren't  worth impressing in the first place and would not limit their concern with prestige to which school someone attended. Besides, I think that most people (and most people can't rattle off various Harvard acceptance rates) would automatically be impressed by the Harvard label and wouldn't  think much about breaking prestige down within the university.

I must also say, and this is just from my experience, that education students as a whole are some of the most friendly. If that's  because the ultra competitive, prestige driven type A's are more drawn to other areas they consider superior then I'm glad that happens.

Edited April 16, 2016 by Cat Time

[Levon3]

@Gabrielle, HGSE's masters acceptance rate was 53% a few years ago when I was admitted. I don't remember whether that was on the HGSE website or on US News & World report, but it was a credible source. Nevertheless, it's comparable to other top-tier schools of education. The fact of the matter is that there is less reason to pursue advanced degrees in education as compared to many other fields, making some of these programs less competitive. Moreover, often the masters programs are bulked up to fund doctoral work, resulting in a lot of acceptances. This, of course, means that many will look down their noses at the ed school, but if your goal was to gain prestige and feel superior to others, my guess is that you wouldn't have chosen this field either. So, I don't let those comments bother me. The PhD and EdD programs at Harvard have lower acceptance rates than many of Harvard's other schools, and there are plenty of people in them who have perfect GREs + amazing intellects. 

The last two quotes you shared don't actually seem derogatory to me. I'm glad we have gritty (as in, perseverant) 30 year olds trying to change the field of education, and OF COURSE professional experience is considered along with academics. By considering professional experience, HGSE admits many who were perhaps undermatched in undergrad, but have proven that they are tremendous leaders, genuine doers, as well as transcendent thinkers. ALL of the graduate programs at Harvard consider professional experience in tandem with academics. 

You will certainly find people who want to assuage their personal insecurity by belittling the ed school, but it is a great school, full of incredible people who do go on to change the field of education. Congratulations on your acceptance!

[mbfox125]

Yeah I would not worry, I mean it's a   Ed.M , so yeah it probably does have a high acceptance rate but a lot of master degrees do because they are a source of founding for the departmetn, since its a   Ed.M  not a MA it makes sense that profession experience is highly valued, its a practitioners degree. So yeah there will be people who look down on it, but that's their program, the people you will be applying to work for won't be among them. As long as the program trains you well ( and has good outcomes for their graduates) that  what matters. 

[Gabrielle]

Any other insight is helpful! 

[nm16]

I'm also unclear why those quotes are considered "harsh" -- any elaboration on this would be great, OP!

If I'm assuming correctly, the first quote is addressing age (?) and privilege as an issue...  HGSE does a great job in trying to reflect educators from diverse parts of the country, if not the entire world. While I was in the program, there were plenty of educators with 10+ years of experience, and just as many fresh out of undergrad.  I thoroughly enjoyed learning from both types of grad students during my time there. Secondly, given that this is a masters program where most people shell out $$$ to attend, there are definitely students who do come from backgrounds of privilege, who arguably have a "savior complex", etc etc.  I don't think this took anything away from my HGSE experience; in fact, it was much appreciated to have these people in my classroom, striving to learn how to be allies for all young people and listening to other perspectives. 

I would also echo previous posters' sentiments about the value of profession along with academics.  To be honest, I don't think HGSE values one more/less than the other.  I have certainly met HGSE students who parade their work experience and belittle the coursework, or vice versa.  These students have been few and far in between, and the HGSE alum I run into now testify very positively to the value of their graduate education and opportunities at HGSE.

Lastly, I've dipped into several of the schools across Harvard, and have a few friends outside of HGSE -- at the biz school, HKS, the College, Med School, etc.  None of said friends have said the ed school was a "joke" or anything similar -- anecdotal, but there you have it! HGSE certainly has areas for improvement, but lack of prestige compared to other Harvard schools would never have been the dealbreaker for me, personally.  There are other issues (in education) to be worried about.  

[Chai_latte]

This is not specific to HGSE.  It's the field of education, in general.  

Full disclosure: I'm in an ed program & I came from STEM

There was a big article in the NY Times a few years back that listed undergrad major and weekly study hours.  Education was at the bottom of the list; those majors put in the fewest hours (the arts and STEM were at the top).  The GRE scores reported to US News show that the average score for admitted doctoral candidates at top schools is at least  200 points lower than the GRE scores for engineering masters candidates at equivalent institutions (using the old scoring system).  Many education masters applicants don't have to take the GRE at all.  Not surprisingly, the acceptance rates are high (at least a couple of yrs ago HGSE & TC were at, or above, 50%).  And finally, when some people criticize the American educational system, there are grumblings that the field doesn't attract the "brightest lights".  

These realities/perceptions may be "harsh", but WHO CARES?  

My program is a great fit for me.  Yes, it requires fewer hours than STEM.  Yes, the program's GRE scores are comparatively low & its acceptance rate is comparatively high.  No, my classmates (and I) aren't idiots.  

If HGSE meets your needs, go!  And, enjoy your time there.  Take advantage of every opportunity.  Congratulations & good luck!     

[Vulpix]

Obviously most of us speaking on this thread and forum respect education as a field and want to study it.  There definitely is a broader stigma, not specific to HGSE (that's a separate conversation that can be had within the school).  However, a masters in education is THE most ubiquitous/common masters degree in the US.  I think I read once that 30% of all masters degrees awarded in this country were in Education last year.  Part of this is because increasing numbers of states require a masters degree for teachers, and there are millions of teachers out there.  Not all of them are brilliant.  Many teachers get their masters online just to fulfill this requirement.  

The thing is, and I hope I'm wrong about this in my year to come at HGSE, but up until now I have considered all education classes I've taken to be something of a joke, rigor-wise.  Similarly, most teachers I know who have finished their masters degrees (at respectable and known institutions in or near NYC such as Fordham, Pace, CUNY, Rutgers, and TC) have almost unanimously agreed that they considered their masters degrees to be "a joke" and a "waste of time."  Now, a lot of that is tied up with completing a masters concurrently with teaching (obviously teaching is the bigger priority, and writing papers related to it just feels like a waste of your time that could be better spent in other ways).  I knew a high school history teacher who would proudly boast that none of his degrees (and he had a BA/MA/PhD) were in "Education."

I'm one of those previously mentioned teachers, too.  I am a month (!) away from finishing an MS Ed I started in January 2014 at CUNY Hunter.  While I've intermittently enjoyed and loathed the experience, almost every assignment I've had has felt like busy work and/or a joke.  Right now, this has suited me, because I'm teaching full time and really don't have the time or energy to really think deeply about what I'm learning or reading anyway.  The fact that I have a 4.0 is less representative of my incredible work ethic and more representative of the lack of rigor in my program, IMO.  Granted, I know that not everyone has a 4.0, but enough of my peers also received an A+ in a course that we half-assed to know that something is off here.

I know that CUNY, being a public city school (with a great and respected history), may be less rigorous than TC (although my friends at TC don't speak too highly of it either).  That being said, I went to Vassar for undergrad, which I felt was EXTREMELY rigorous, in EVERY subject EXCEPT education.  I was a History major, Education minor.  In college, I had to work my ass off to get an A in every class, no matter the department.... every class except for Education.  I always got an A in my education classes, as did all of my friends.  Again, this has NOTHING to do with me being particularly skilled in Education content.  (In fact, of my teacher certification exams, and there are 3 in NY, I did best on History and the general knowledge test, and actually scored pretty unimpressively/average on the teaching skills exam.... which again brings into question the A's I received in such classes).  There is definitely a flaw in this system, not just at the schools I've attended, but more broadly, where the study of education is simply not held up to the same levels of academic rigor as other subject areas.  Part of this must be inherent though, because unlike chemistry or history, education is much more abstract and much harder to test, weed out individuals unsuited for it, etc.  

I have insomnia

Edited April 21, 2016 by Heather1011

[Levon3]

I was clearly wrong in my comment that there's less reason to pursue advanced degrees in education. (I was speaking from a state where master's degrees aren't required.) That's what I get for speculating rather than looking up facts. 

[Vulpix]

9 hours ago, Levon3 said:

I was clearly wrong in my comment that there's less reason to pursue advanced degrees in education. (I was speaking from a state where master's degrees aren't required.) That's what I get for speculating rather than looking up facts. 

Yeah, in New York if you don't get a master's within 5 years of your bachelors, your teaching certificate expires.  I think it's the same in much of the Northeast.  It's the reason I rushed into doing one I didn't really care about without thinking about if there was something out there more meaningful to me.

Interestingly enough, your masters does NOT actually have to be in education, it just has to be relevant in some way, I think.  Like if you are a science teacher, your masters can just be in Biology.  If you're an elementary teacher, you can get a master's in psychology or social work.  You just need to have ANY masters to continue working in public schools.  Kind of like how my master's is in Literacy, but I am teaching math and my certification is in social studies (although Literacy is still an ed degree).

Edited April 21, 2016 by Heather1011

[Gabrielle]

I think the higher acceptance rates into the ed school was part of my prior reasoning for the stigma around the school....but these posts have been very insightful and I'm happy I posted to read other poster's opinions. Any other contributions are welcome!

[jlt646]

@Gabrielle Some others have asked for clarification about what exactly is offensive about those quotes that you used as examples, and I'm jumping on that bandwagon. 

Here's my two cents, if you're still looking. I have found that folks with degrees in "education," rather than a subfield, are looked down on in parts of the academy. In undergrad, my professors attempted to convince me to pursue a different path...until I talked about my research interests, my career goals, and my desire to gain knowledge in a specific area. I worked hard to get to this place. There is an especially large stigma re: master's programs in the humanities and social sciences, especially in prestigious universities, because they are (usually) not funded and often the sheer volume of degrees conferred makes the programs feel a little bit like diploma mills. For evidence of this, do some research about TC's rep (here, reddit, etc). 

Your mileage may vary. Everyone's experience is different, of course, and you will get out of the program what you put into it. If you know what you want and why you're going to graduate school, don't let petty people rain on your totally awesome parade. 

[Vulpix]

1 hour ago, jlt646 said:

@Gabrielle Some others have asked for clarification about what exactly is offensive about those quotes that you used as examples, and I'm jumping on that bandwagon. 

Here's my two cents, if you're still looking. I have found that folks with degrees in "education," rather than a subfield, are looked down on in parts of the academy. In undergrad, my professors attempted to convince me to pursue a different path...until I talked about my research interests, my career goals, and my desire to gain knowledge in a specific area. I worked hard to get to this place. There is an especially large stigma re: master's programs in the humanities and social sciences, especially in prestigious universities, because they are (usually) not funded and often the sheer volume of degrees conferred makes the programs feel a little bit like diploma mills. For evidence of this, do some research about TC's rep (here, reddit, etc). 

Your mileage may vary. Everyone's experience is different, of course, and you will get out of the program what you put into it. If you know what you want and why you're going to graduate school, don't let petty people rain on your totally awesome parade. 

TC is in a weird position and has kind of let its quality/competitiveness slip for whatever reason.  Now, this could also be due to Columbia's value placed on TC...

[COGSCI]

On 4/23/2016 at 5:24 AM, Gabrielle said:

I think the higher acceptance rates into the ed school was part of my prior reasoning for the stigma around the school....but these posts have been very insightful and I'm happy I posted to read other poster's opinions. Any other contributions are welcome!

It really depends on what you want to do after you graduate. Ed.M. is considered as a professional degree and other M.S. or M.A. psyc degrees are more research based in many cases. This is why Ed.M. programs generally have higher acceptance rate because you are not paired with a faculty member to do research or senior project (I don't really know about your program specifically). If your research/career interests can be fulfilled through Ed.M. I do not think there is a problem. 

You will find "gritty 30 year olds trying to change the field of education" or "relies more on professional experience than academics" because some of them are teachers with years of teaching experience and they bring the practical side during class discussions. Sometimes you learn from these people more than you learn from the actual course so that is something that you consider as an opportunity. 

[Gabrielle]

The quoted part made me slightly concerned with the notion that some would look down on having more professional experience versus coming from a stringent academic background. However, everyone's responses have been helpful and I'm really starting to abide by the "To each their own" philosophy. Thank you!
 

[MAC2809]

Hello,

 

Being from the West Coast- the prestige of the school isn't as important as it is in the east coast ( I have lived in both.) With that said, HGSE has many critical thinkers that are big players in educational academia. In California, UCLA is the majority of leading scholars that higher education schools use, especially ones that incorporate Critical Theories. Is the HGSE has "hard" to get into than say Harvard Law, kennedy, or HC- not at all. But for a lot of people, that isn't really a big deal.

[TheMustang]

I'm finishing up my year here at HGSE, and as long as coming here will specifically help you reach your professional goals, who cares about what others have to say?  I've met many friends this school year from the the other schools at Harvard such as the Law School, Kennedy School, GSAS, Divinity School, College, etc.; none of them have "looked down" on me for going to the Ed School and all have respected the work I'm trying to do.  Regarding the acceptance rate, Ed schools are highly self-selective thus leading to those higher rates.  Basically the main people applying to HGSE are people who are truly passionate about the education field and want to make a difference.  So yeah, don't be discouraged by any stupid stigma. 

[elveintiocho]

On 30 de abril de 2016 at 9:33 PM, MAC2809 said:

Is the HGSE has "hard" to get into than say Harvard Law, kennedy, or HC- not at all. But for a lot of people, that isn't really a big deal.

I've met people this year who weren't accepted to HGSE and were accepted to HKS. It really is all about being a good fit.

[UrbanMidwest]

@Heather1011

I'm currently a candidate for a master's in social work. I'm taking a survey course in welfare history and it's rather easy. So far all the assignments were somewhat of a breeze. The only "hard" part was figuring out a couple of questions on quizzes that had unclear wording, making it hard to understand what exactly it was asking.

@Gabrielle

I wouldn't think much about it. If you're are excelling in the program due to your work ethic and being "the best" within your cohort I don't think you should be insecure. But facts are facts: out of all of Harvard's graduate programs the GSE master's program alongside Kennedy's MPP program have higher acceptance rates. It is what it is. As another poster said certain fields will be inherently easier to obtain admission for various reasons. I think in order to prove the dissenters/snobs wrong is being the star of the program. Every graduate program has its stars - be one of them.

When you graduate you'll be part of the Harvard family (more so than Tyra Banks, bless her heart).

 

[UrbanMidwest]

On 4/21/2016 at 5:19 PM, Heather1011 said:

Yeah, in New York if you don't get a master's within 5 years of your bachelors, your teaching certificate expires.  I think it's the same in much of the Northeast.  It's the reason I rushed into doing one I didn't really care about without thinking about if there was something out there more meaningful to me.

Interestingly enough, your masters does NOT actually have to be in education, it just has to be relevant in some way, I think.  Like if you are a science teacher, your masters can just be in Biology.  If you're an elementary teacher, you can get a master's in psychology or social work.  You just need to have ANY masters to continue working in public schools.  Kind of like how my master's is in Literacy, but I am teaching math and my certification is in social studies (although Literacy is still an ed degree).

bold: I'm not an educator, but I find this somewhat strange. Some of the best teachers I've had in elementary school and in high school didn't have a master's. (Keep in mind I went to private schools in the Midwest, so being certified wasn't a criteria.) They were erudite about their subject and were effective teachers. Math was my weakest subject and I was grateful to have a teacher that made it approachable - the man had a gift.

I'm also surprised that elementary teachers needing a master's can get it in social work. Everyone in my cohort is entering the field with the mentality that they're going to be social workers, whether it's in schools, hospitals, hospices, government agencies, or in policy work.

second bold: Many of the teachers in my high school that had a master's had it in their subject e.g. chemistry - master's in chemistry, bio - master's in bio, music - master's in music ed. Again, keep in mind this was in a private school setting. If a teacher was looking for a job in English and my high school had an opening, they'd first look if he had a degree in English and his teaching experience. A master's wasn't needed. Of course, my high school's degree standard isn't the same with other privates within the area. One private boasts that at least 70% of its faculty has a master's. I get the feeling that my high school encouraged its faculty to get a terminal degree if it furthered their knowledge about their subject; I didn't get the feeling that was for marketing.

Edited May 23, 2016 by UrbanMidwest

[Vulpix]

17 hours ago, UrbanMidwest said:

bold: I'm not an educator, but I find this somewhat strange. Some of the best teachers I've had in elementary school and in high school didn't have a master's. (Keep in mind I went to private schools in the Midwest, so being certified wasn't a criteria.) They were erudite about their subject and were effective teachers. Math was my weakest subject and I was grateful to have a teacher that made it approachable - the man had a gift.

I'm also surprised that elementary teachers needing a master's can get it in social work. Everyone in my cohort is entering the field with the mentality that they're going to be social workers, whether it's in schools, hospitals, hospices, government agencies, or in policy work.

second bold: Many of the teachers in my high school that had a master's had it in their subject e.g. chemistry - master's in chemistry, bio - master's in bio, music - master's in music ed. Again, keep in mind this was in a private school setting. If a teacher was looking for a job in English and my high school had an opening, they'd first look if he had a degree in English and his teaching experience. A master's wasn't needed. Of course, my high school's degree standard isn't the same with other privates within the area. One private boasts that at least 70% of its faculty has a master's. I get the feeling that my high school encouraged its faculty to get a terminal degree if it furthered their knowledge about their subject; I didn't get the feeling that was for marketing.

Well, I'm not exactly sure when this became a common mandate in some states (certainly in the last 30 years, possibly the last 20...).  What state are you in?  I think there are just *so* many teachers in these states that they needed to make it more competitive to some degree.  For example, for every public high school history position that opens up in New York state (for example Long Island, but also many places upstate), the job gets over 2,000 applications from certified/experienced history teachers.  This is in deep contrast with places I know of like Nevada and Mississippi that have such a severe teacher shortage they are recruiting out of state.

I definitely agree that teaching is in many ways an art, and degrees don't tell the full story, and that some people are natural educators without all those certificates.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Heather1011

[UrbanMidwest]

5 hours ago, Heather1011 said:

Well, I'm not exactly sure when this became a common mandate in some states (certainly in the last 30 years, possibly the last 20...).  What state are you in?  I think there are just *so* many teachers in these states that they needed to make it more competitive to some degree.  For example, for every public high school history position that opens up in New York state (for example Long Island, but also many places upstate), the job gets over 2,000 applications from certified/experienced history teachers.  This is in deep contrast with places I know of like Nevada and Mississippi that have such a severe teacher shortage they are recruiting out of state.

I'm from the state of Illinois.

A paradox for using the master's as a way to distinguish one self is that eventually the trend will catch on and then the master's will be the ubiquitous degree. The gluttony of applicants is probably the byproduct of many political, if not controversial things e.g. too many people attending university, economy just not keeping up with the workforce demand, too many deciding to enter education.

I'm trying to think of my friends who are in elementary or high school education ... I do believe each found a job within six months of graduation. One's an elementary music teacher, another is a high school history teacher, another teaches AP History at a private high school, and the rest are elementary teachers teaching reading and social sciences, a mixture of public and private. I believe only one received her master's before she was fully employed; the rest were hired straight out of undergrad with some gaining their master's a few years down the line.

[Vulpix]

17 hours ago, UrbanMidwest said:

I'm from the state of Illinois.

A paradox for using the master's as a way to distinguish one self is that eventually the trend will catch on and then the master's will be the ubiquitous degree. The gluttony of applicants is probably the byproduct of many political, if not controversial things e.g. too many people attending university, economy just not keeping up with the workforce demand, too many deciding to enter education.

I'm trying to think of my friends who are in elementary or high school education ... I do believe each found a job within six months of graduation. One's an elementary music teacher, another is a high school history teacher, another teaches AP History at a private high school, and the rest are elementary teachers teaching reading and social sciences, a mixture of public and private. I believe only one received her master's before she was fully employed; the rest were hired straight out of undergrad with some gaining their master's a few years down the line.

I have some friends, all as relatively qualified as you would want them to be and likable interviews, who are now 8 years out of college and still have not secured a full time teaching job.  They've been subbing for years. It's definitely the superfluity of educated people near New York City.   EVERYONE has a masters degree so it has become less significant.

[crashtest]

On 5/24/2016 at 5:13 PM, Heather1011 said:

I have some friends, all as relatively qualified as you would want them to be and likable interviews, who are now 8 years out of college and still have not secured a full time teaching job.  They've been subbing for years. It's definitely the superfluity of educated people near New York City.   EVERYONE has a masters degree so it has become less significant.

Competition.  New York pays it's teachers well, which is a major underlying cause.

On a related note I've been involved in hiring at a public high school, no one cares if you have a masters.  That only matters for certification and politics.  At the school level we only care that you're sane, concern about students and won't generate headaches for admin.  The only exception I ever saw was the hiring of a teacher that was also expected to teach a dual enrollment course, offering college and high school credit.  Then we could only consider applicants with a masters in content; a masters in education doesn't meet the regional accreditation requirements.

Edited May 28, 2016 by crashtest

[Vulpix]

16 minutes ago, crashtest said:

Competition.  New York pays it's teachers well, which is a major underlying cause.

On a related note I've been involved in hiring at a public high school, no one cares if you have a masters.  That only matters for certification and politics.  At the school level we only care that you're sane, concern about students and won't generate headaches for admin.  The only exception I ever saw was the hiring of a teacher that was also expected to teach a dual enrollment course (college and high school credit).  Then we could only consider applicants with a masters in content (a masters in education doesn't meet the regional accreditation requirements).

Makes sense to me.  I never considered my masters degree as something that would "impress" a committee, although I do think in some areas where teachers are scarce it may be significant to some degree.  But then again in some places so is a BA.