The author should understand the importance of Phds in India. Hope the author and agarwal are two 'gentlemen' who dont have any work to do and writing these kind of columns.
He can write a research paper on "Expiry of Eduction" The next article of the same author could be: Why not have an expiry date for MBBS Doctors)?
RE:Re: Why not have an expiry date for PhDs?
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:37 PM Permalink
and the article is not about "expiry of education" it is about expiry of that certification that says that u r good
RE:Re: Why not have an expiry date for PhDs?
by sreenivas murthy on Jan 18, 2008 06:49 PM Permalink
Dear Mr. Srihari you need to understand that a PhD is awarded on completion of a research in a particular topic or subject. The same subject need not be relevant a few years later or a decade later, hence the suggestion of an expiry date has some value. it will not expire provided the person has published, novel idea indeed. on the other hand MBBS has a structured programme in training young doctors, and usually their subjects are upto date in the textbooks at least. Whether the system of MBBS training needs to be addressed and overhauled is the question? Dr. Sreenivas
RE:Re: Why not have an expiry date for PhDs?
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:53 PM Permalink
THANK GOD THAT I HAVE FOUND YOU TO BE PERSON WHO REALLY UNDERSTANDS THE ARTICLE
Why single out Ph.D. The concepts change in most of the subjects over a period of 20 years, like Physics, economics Electronics, etc. So masters degree holders in such subjects should undergo a semester or two of updation studies and regain their degree.
phd degree is awarded after recognised research work.but every research work has a usefullness for some time after lapse of time the research work is required to be updated.we should make use of persons holding phd.scientist shall be put on contract bases after retirement.they should be result oriented and not waste time in office and playing politics.they must give the chance to young generation.
Whatever you mentioned may not stand for a science/Engineering Ph. D. Degree...
Still we refer Ph. D. theses and jounals of 20s or 30s, which provides substantial information for todays scientific advancement/technological development...
Regading journals, there is something called "value of impact factor", it is always better to publish in a journal having impact factor more than 3, than 10 papers in a journal having impact factor 0.3..
MOre or less, do not pull out a conclusion based on your observation in a single field/area/topic/instance.
RE:Its a negetive thought.....Mr. author.
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:44 PM Permalink
u r again missing the point... the fact that ur work done 40 years ago is still very valued is not being questioned here... what is being questioned is that whether u still r as good as you were then.. got it
RE:RE:Its a negetive thought.....Mr. author.
by Bammy on Jan 18, 2008 06:51 PM Permalink
see, then the work component should be in question, not the Ph. D. which was done 40 years back as that might be prividing substantial information to fresh guys who venture recent times... ...After doing Ph. D., some body is not working being in that field !!! That hardly anybody does, they still continue to work and explore many things which may not be related to their Ph. D., Then how the question of "expire" comes if it is useful by somebody else after 40 years..
RE:RE:RE:Its a negetive thought.....Mr. author.
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 07:00 PM Permalink
u r again missing the point! we are NOT talking about the expiry of the WORK!!! we are talking about the diminishing ability of the researcher!!!
RE:Its a negetive thought.....Mr. author.
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:32 PM Permalink
u r missing the point... it is not the fact that a 100 year old paper is still useful now, is being questioned here...
but the fact that someone who did his phd 40years back needs to continue publishing "good" papers so that his/her skills may be verifiably up-to-date
RE:Its a negetive thought.....Mr. author.
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:58 PM Permalink
then these researchers who continue to publish "good" meaningful papers (not just working papers) will automatically have their phds extended as per the article! so why r they afraid. the only ppl spitting venom here are the ones who have not published anything worthwhile after getting hold of their phd diploma and hence are afraid to death if this suggestion by the author is implemented.
Some one is putting all his efforts and hard work not only to get a Phd degree but afterwards to get a job based on his degree. One employer never appoints some one who doesn't have enough caliber and once he is employed he has to continue with his good performance to be competitive in the field. So I really don't understand the stupid logic of the writer.
RE:one of the stupid article ever read in my life
by Munish Oberoi on Jan 18, 2008 06:26 PM Permalink
If ur sole aim for a phd is to get a JOB .... GOD help human kind!!!
RE:one of the stupid article ever read in my life
by youth on Jan 18, 2008 06:33 PM Permalink
everyone need job for their survival....r u giving money for researchers survival so that they should stop worrying abt jobs....first get a PhD to be able to talk on this matter.specially in science stream then u will understand the meaning of earning a phd
RE:one of the stupid article ever read in my life
by sibu enchanattu on Jan 18, 2008 06:42 PM Permalink
no man after getting a phd I will do research for man kind and go to streets to beg for my survival. Aim of most of research institutes all over the world is to explore knowledge and share it to others through publication. So there is no need to stress on this point. This is the soul aim of public research in most of the countries...
