Within the field of higher education, Colleges of Education, in conjunction with the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED), are working to distinguish the Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) as a distinct doctoral degree designed for scholar-practitioners. The purpose of this study was to identify the perceptions of current Ed.D. students and alumni in CPED-affiliated programs regarding their program benefits. Q methodology, a mixed method approach designed to examine individuals' subjective opinions and perceptions in a systematic way, was used to study the participants' viewpoints. Participants received a concourse of 61 statements to sort based on their opinions of their program's benefits, using a +5 (most important benefit) to -5 (least important benefit) scale. In addition, participants completed a post-sort survey designed to collect demographic information and gather a more in-depth perception of each participant's highest three statements (+5) and lowest three statements (-5). Data were analyzed through factor analysis to determine six distinct factor groups with opinions about Ed.D. program benefits. The. The results of this study indicate that Ed.D. students hold varied opinions about the benefits of their programs. The six factors formed through the analysis illustrated that students chose their Ed.D. programs to gain research skills, for leadership development, for enhanced earnings and job prospects, to gain credentials and recognition, to become change agents, or for personal change. These six groups were all distinguished from each other in their opinions and represented a range of ages, races/ethnicities, job functions, and institutional types. The insights provided from these participants highlighted that younger students were very focused on career advancement and increased earnings, whereas older students were more interested in self-directed learning and personal growth. In addition, individuals seeking to gain practical research skills were less interested than their peers in personal growth and networking. Interestingly, while multiple groups illustrated an interest in change, the types of change individuals sought ranged from personal change to the ability to become a change agent within their workplaces and in the field. Given the wide range of individuals applying to Ed.D. programs, program directors and colleges of education should consider the various viewpoints presented in this study in an effort to meet prospective student, current student, and alumni demands and expectations. Similarly, with program format highlighted as a key factor in program selection by the majority of participants, this current study can be utilized as a platform for further discussions with faculty and administrators about program redesigns. By adding to the limited research base on this topic and offering practical implications for Ed.D. programs, this study serves to further the CPED agenda within the field. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]