Discussion Overview
The discussion centers around the online Master's program in Applied Physics offered by Johns Hopkins University. Participants are exploring the program's structure, its affiliation with the School of Engineering, and the experiences of those who have completed or are pursuing the degree. The conversation also touches on the nature of online doctoral programs in general.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Debate/contested
- Technical explanation
Main Points Raised
- One participant inquires about the difficulty and value of the online Master's program, noting its high cost.
- Another participant finds it interesting that the program is offered through the School of Engineering, questioning if this is a common practice for Applied Physics graduate programs.
- Some participants mention that Harvard has a similar organizational structure, with Applied Physics in the School of Engineering and Physics in the School of Arts and Sciences.
- There is a discussion about another institution, Bircham International University, which offers remote PhDs, raising questions about how they conduct physics labs.
- A participant clarifies that Bircham does not offer labs and discusses the distinctions between different types of doctorate degrees, including Ph.D. and D.S., as outlined on Bircham's website.
- Another participant expresses surprise at the terminology used by Bircham regarding North American education systems and asks if others have encountered similar distinctions between Ph.D. and D.S. in North America or elsewhere.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express curiosity about the program's structure and the nature of online doctoral degrees, but there is no consensus on the commonality of such organizational structures across institutions or on the distinctions between doctorate degrees. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the experiences with the Johns Hopkins program and the broader implications of online education.
Contextual Notes
Some participants reference specific institutional policies and distinctions that may not be universally recognized, indicating a potential limitation in shared understanding of doctoral degree classifications.
