So last night, I attended orientation for the program I am beginning next week, a PhD in Public Policy that I will be attending part-time at a relatively well regarded university. (2 courses this term, while working full-time.)

To make a long story short, I am a director at the university I will be attending. I feel that I need to obtain a doctorate to stay in higher ed admin, and move ahead. I decided on a PhD at a relatively well regarded school instead of an EdD/etc because I felt I would overall get more respect from it and the time would be better spent.

That said, orientation mortified me. Stories of studying for 6 months straight for comps, taking 1.5 years to get the PROPOSAL for a dissertation written, etc. The sheer time commitment.

Am I insane? Should I go and do an EdD that would be, in theory, faster and relatively easier?

Nonsense, you're over-qualified compared to all the other edu-monkeys you started with. How d'you reckon they feel?! Good luck all the same!

I would recommend you take this free course: how to survive your PhD: https://www.edx.org/course/how-survive-phd-anux-rsit-01x#!

It is going to be a hell of a time commitment; there's no way around that. As a part-time student, you are going to need to spend around 15 hours per week on your PhD, for the next 6-8 years... I don't know how this compares with a EdD.

But, like Ed said, you are already ahead of some of the less experienced students. Not everyone needs to spend months cramming for the defense. People doing a PhD are called 'student' for a reason - people might be working long hours but they are not always being productive (think hangovers, chatting, facebooking etc). You probably won't be wasting time doing those things, so the path may be easier and less time consuming for you.

And the psychological advantages- knowing the institution, the area, the people, the administrative system etc. That's a major advantage from the start.

Thanks for the response, guys. I am still terrified, but do feel a tiny bit better. :-/