I do not completely deny author's idea. I do understand there is an enormous amount of effort that goes in PhD. ( and thats why it is also called Permanent Head Damage :) ).
The only point in the favor of author that I have is what if a PhD is not so active 10 yrs after he receives it in his field. There are woman who receive PhDs but end up being house wives. Just because they have PhDs their opinion cannot be taken for granted even if they are not active in their field.
Another point in favor of those who oppose this article and my earlier point. If someone is inactive in his field they today's industry may not reward him either. One has to keep abreast of changes otherwise (s)he may not be position to give value added inputs. The system will itself fail the individual.
I can forsee that this idea may not die as number of PhDs are increasing and at some point where there is a competition, one may even have to prove that (s)he is competitive even 15 yrs after receiving the PhD. Thats my $0.02
RE:A neutral vuew point
by arvind singh on Jan 19, 2008 11:50 PM Permalink
Hi, I do respect the idea but before that I would like to insist on the point that the PhD itself should be given to the correct person and correct effort. There should be certain standars for awardng PhD itself. In India atleast what I feel is that the award of PhD itself depends a lot on the guide, the lab and the nature of work. Why not have strict standards for PhD itself. Why should a person gets PhD just becasue he is in a certain lab under certain guide merely and not becasue he or she possess the qualities of being a good researcher? I think improve the standards at college and university level itself , reduce the numbers and increase the quality & competition. There will not be any need for expiry then. Its a complex matter. It depends on the nature of work / problem also. It took a long 10 years for certain protein in a lab. not if the expiry would have been less than 10 years the guide would have not even tries to continue that work instead he would have done some smaller work and published a number of papers in smaller journals!
RE:A neutral vuew point
by parasu gokulan on Jan 20, 2008 08:38 PM Permalink
PhD work takes around 5 years to complete. It is not an easy job and fixing an expiry date is the most idiotic thing to do. An idea proposed is an idea sown. The researcher might not be active but the PhD is the degree given in recognition of his effort put in realizing something new.
The author has no idea about research and life as a PhD student. Firstly, a PhD is just not a "degree". It requires a great deal of tenacity, perseverance and intellect. PhD it self stands for Doctor of Philosophy, implying that its more about the journey or the philosophy of research than the research itself. At the end of the work, the training and skill set that the person has acquired is more important than what the outcome was. As such it is deplorable if the person is judged on the basis of how many papers he has published than what was the quality of the research work. Thats why a PhD is "awarded" on the recommendation of the guide and not after fulfilling a certain paper requirement or number of years of work. Secondly, most PhD's either continue in academics or industrial research after obtaining the degree and any further mobility is based on the previous years' track record of the candidate. So the work that the PhD has been doing post-degree will be the grounds on which he'll be judged and meritocracy is self-evident to someone who knows the area well. Lastly, the skills that you acquire in the process of research are life-long and you cannot put an expiration date on them. How you better yourself by keeping abreast with the latest developments is upto that person, it cannot be enforced. It is something that they will have do to survive in the field.
This author has no idea of what he is talking about. Most of the Phd's in academeic area contnue their research even after Phd. So either this author has no post graduate education or he has never been with any person getting good Phd. Shame on publishing such rediculous article.
I am not convinced with the authors. If this will be appriciated they again challange the Engineers, Doctors and other professionals. This Ph.D. is not just a single degree it is the study of a technique to learn so many things and the techniques you learn and the skills you develop can not be spoiled. So how one can say that it is outdated????? I think the author's must rethink and review their understanding of Ph.D. and I'm fully agree with the views of Prof. Subrahmanya
"Can just one degree ... make a person fit for jobs needing very high skill levels?" Ph.D is the third degree on gets, after Bachelor's and Master's degrees! Ph.D is not just 'one' degree!
"I know of 'professors' who, in order to get published before promotion interview have started their own journals" Wrong! Professor's post is the highest ranking job in academics, there will not be any more promotions for professors!
"you'd need 60,000 top-class peer reviewers. There's no way anyone can claim that such a large number is available" It is estimated that about 1% of population will get Ph.D. That means, about 6.6 crore doctorates are available in the world, much higher than 60,000! Further thousands of non-doctorate peer reviewers of good quality will also be available in the world!
"a very minor step has been taken by those universities (like the JNU) which insist that assistant professors, in order to become associate professors, must undergo an orientation course. I wonder how many other universities and institutes like the IITs and the IIMs have even this requirement." How many publications, patents, and sponsored projects do faculty of JNU get every year because of this 'good' move? Please compare the corresponding figures for IITs and IIMs.
In any Bachelor's or Master's degree in whichever subject, the emphasis is on gaining knowledge.Further development after the degree is the person's prerogative.The PhD though is a different ball game.It is more about the process of research than actually getting the degree.So you get to write a thesis and are awarded the degree when substantial progress has been made in the way learning and application are done. In my boss's words - "I will let you submit your thesis when I am convinced that you can THINK". Thinking is a process that I believe is not something that you can test.What we need is a process by which research funding increases in this country and the quality of researchers who can THINK goes up.60,000 reviewers are a small drop in the ocean when you consider the potential of our country. There are too many brilliant people who simply dont do anything worthwhile as the returns are not commensurate.
RE:RE:What nonsense?
by BALA krishna on Jan 19, 2008 01:52 PM Permalink
fittin reply to useless article..keep it up bhagwhat.. really one should think phd is not a degree one gives and other tke.. it's the way the thinking proceess of the person is moulded.. may this author did phd in an useless university which just gives rather to teach how to analysis a problem and solve..
PhD is not at all similar to any other qualification, as there is a need to do original work, which in European and British system may take 4-5 years or more. American system is much easier, but even there it takes about 4 years. Only about 30 percent of the students get the final PhD, because most of them drop out in the process. There is an extreme chance factor as well. Because everything depends on two individuals: one is the supervisor and another is the examiner. Thus, any subjective matters can influence the outcome. Any small oinion can ruin the candidate. It is not thus at all the same as any other examinations, where there are many examiners who may not know the candidate at all. Normally those who get PhD spent their entire life in studies and research. There are of course exceptions like Man Mohan Singh and everyother economists who have joined the government or the World Bank or IMF or Newspapers; they need to wrote reports but they do not do any more research. That is the reason most PhD who are interested to pursue their scholarship do not join these services. Expiry period already exists in practice and it is about 3 years. After that one cannot claim any expertise on the same subject unless one would pursue further. However, expiry period does not exist for IAS, IFS, Engineer, Doctors accountants. They just get a degree and test for the rest of their life without increasing their knowledge.
I am tempted to say something nasty but will with all scholarly dignity refrain from it and treat it as an inane piece of unwanted pretentious space-filling garbage.
