Talk:Engineering Doctorate

Broken Link

Promotional pamphlet by EPSRC (pdf) Is 404. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.127.3 (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Untitled

What's the problem with adding links to the article? At least leave the EPSRC link. This is not a product people pay for, but a scheme that is funded by the EPSRC.

My rewrite of the article gives a link in the references to EPSRC's page listing all the centres that offer EngDs. That's enough, I think. -Splash - tk 12:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Engineering Doctorate vs Doctor of Engineering

I've added a paragraph from the old Doctor of Engineering article, because that's a fairly commonly-offered program in the United States. Are the Eng.D. and the D.Eng. functionally equivalent? Or are they different enough that Doctor of Engineering should be demerged? Argyriou (talk) 08:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Major improvement needed

The article is rather contrived and misses the point. The main differences between a traditional UK PhD degree and the EngD that should be emphasized are as follows:

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

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 on 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 for entry into the academic career. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 12:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above comments. As for point (4), I doubt the EngD was invented with an academic career path in mind, it's certainly not what I want if I'm successful in getting mine! It might be worth mentioning its similarity to Clinical Doctorate in Psychology training programmes in the UK, clinical psychology being another applied science, perhaps medical training as well? I think an education in the applied sciences has some fundamentally different requirements to that in the pure sciences due to the need for people to be trained in the practical application of knowledge in the real world which is why these types of doctorate programmes exist in these fields.--Chardn (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Points 2 and 4 are not quite correct. It is not customary to submit the portfolio at the end of the programme. The portfolio is built up throughout the programme and it is an option to submit this if it is chosen. However the thesis is the normal and common route. The EngD is now seen as superior in academic circles but it is not targetted towards academic careers. At the interview candidates are asked to discuss their reasons for chosing the EngD and they must demonstrate a preference for industry. The EngD is often described as the PhD+ and is assessed to the same standard. It creates the link that is often missing between industry and academia and it is very successful at doing so. 192.91.173.41 (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment. Points 2 and 4 are not accurate. A portfolio is built up over the 4 years spent on the EngD however it is common to submit a thesis. This goes through a Viva process equal to that of PhD. This is why the EngD is not seen as inferior, the standard has to be equal or greater to pass. The EngD spends 4 years on this research and so being an employee of the company is not quite correct, you are more of a contractor carryout the research in a partnership. Lab work is still carried out at the university. There is also a strong emphasis to publish and present in international conferences. You also do not do an EngD to become a lecturer, although I know some that have later on in their career. It is focused on industry. It is referred to as a PhD+ for a reason. There is also a direct link between the research and industry which helps increase its impact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.35.40 (talk) 14:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engineering Doctorate. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121205152331/http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/Pages/minimumpay.aspx to http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/Pages/minimumpay.aspx
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/CMSWeb/Downloads/Other/EngDocStakeholderSurvey.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121021124232/http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/centres/Pages/indd.aspx to http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/centres/Pages/indd.aspx

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:11, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engineering Doctorate. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629212612/http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/centres/Pages/byuni.aspx to http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/funding/students/centres/Pages/byuni.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081123183322/http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/CMSWeb/Downloads/Publications/Other/EngD%20-%20Engineering%20Tomorrow.pdf to http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/CMSWeb/Downloads/Publications/Other/EngD%20-%20Engineering%20Tomorrow.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:03, 21 September 2017 (UTC)