The effects of losing doctoral programs

Many Nevadans have suffered ill effects of our severe economic downturn. The University of Nevada, Reno is no exception. I accept that the college of education, where I have been a professor for 14 years, must share in these difficult times. However, I believe one potential cut will have lasting negative effects on the college, the university, the local community, and the state.

One proposal is that all programs beyond master's degrees be eliminated. This includes doctoral programs, which currently house more than 200 students, 166 of whom are enrolled in classes this semester. This proposal is unsettling for many reasons.

The college currently enrolls the second largest number of doctoral students of UNR's nine colleges and schools. These students are the most racially and ethnically diverse of the COE degree programs. This diversity fits the university's mission to reflect the make-up of Nevada's citizens. It enriches the college experience for all students by expanding awareness of different types of people and varied viewpoints.

Cutting college doctoral programs also has gender implications. Women constitute 47 percent of UNR doctoral students. However, they make up 65 percent of the college's doctoral students. Cutting the highest, most prestigious degree in a field that women tend to choose for advancing themselves and their careers shows little respect for female-dominated occupations.

Northern Nevada schools benefit immensely from education doctoral programs. Many Nevada teachers, principals, and school counselors pursue these degrees locally and return to our education system to apply their expertise.

Further, faculty and doctoral students study teaching and learning in Northern Nevada schools. These studies can help improve classroom instruction by providing information on how children learn and on effective teaching practices. Without this research, we would have to rely on studies conducted in school contexts that may be unlike our own and therefore have limited usefulness for education in Nevada. A better understanding of how to improve achievement in our own schools can only be beneficial as we seek to improve the low performance ranking of Nevada schools compared with other states in the nation.

Doctoral students interact with other students in important ways. They help emphasize that studying the field of education intensely combines with practical expertise to create powerful dynamics between research and school practice. Doctoral students also model possibilities for advanced study, which may inspire undergraduate and master's students to follow the same path. This can continue to return greater expertise in education to Nevada schools.

Faculty have obtained millions of dollars in grants to support research and service programs that benefit countless teachers and students in our schools. Among this wide array of programs are The girls math and technology program, reading buddies, and technology enhanced education for special education teachers. Doctoral students play key roles in planning and running these programs.

The high-standing local, state, national, and international reputation of the UNR College of Education is threatened with this single proposal to eliminate COE doctoral programs. The proposed action reflects a lack of understanding that the field of education is a profession that demands research-based practice and that educators are both scholars and practitioners. Retaining COE doctoral programs would have little, if any, negative financial impact on the university. However, the lasting effects of cutting UNR doctoral degrees in the field of education would be devastating to all levels of education in the state of Nevada.

If you would like to lend your voice to efforts to preserve doctoral programs at the UNR College of Education, please contact me at wiest@unr.edu.

Lynda Wiest is a Professor of mathematics education and educational equity at the University of Nevada, Reno