Over thirty years ago I was an undergraduate student at a fairly prestigious [undefined country] University. Many years later I worked as a technician in a less prestigious [undefined country] University. Part of my work involved assisting overseas [from undefined country] PhD students.. I was appalled to find that Phds were awarded to students who, in my humble opinion, would not have been allowed to enter the [undefined country] University as undergraduates and who never even reached this level during their time at the University.
I understand considerable sums of money were involved.
Is this unusual?
-C2.
wow, you are old. I think there should be age indicator in the forums. I bet you would recieve more respect. Undefined? U mean you wish to keep it secret, or it was dismantled?
There was a recent PBS expose' on the failings of higher education. It seems that in many universities, as long as you attend a few lectures and turn in some papers with your name on them, you can pass any class (you needn't have learned anything).
It is sad. Their was a time where a PhD meant something. Now it is necessary to see what people can actually do rather than what they are supposed to be able to do according to their qualifications.
Then again University's are just big brain washing institutions now. Anywhere that bans St Georges cross and singing Christmas carols encase it offends someone is not about education. I have listened to people who tell me that they get marked down because they don't agree with the social ideals of their teachers.
It is why I got the hell out of the education system as fast as I could. You can learn everything you can at university as home without shelling out a fortune or getting in to debt. PhD's are worthless now so why bother trying to get one. If you can do the job well you will go far and people will come to you because you actually can do your job properly. Shoving a load of diplomas in peoples faces wont get you far anymore and probably wont get you a job.
Not that their are any jobs to get.
Then again University's are just big brain washing institutions now. Anywhere that bans St Georges cross and singing Christmas carols encase it offends someone is not about education. I have listened to people who tell me that they get marked down because they don't agree with the social ideals of their teachers.
It is why I got the hell out of the education system as fast as I could. You can learn everything you can at university as home without shelling out a fortune or getting in to debt. PhD's are worthless now so why bother trying to get one. If you can do the job well you will go far and people will come to you because you actually can do your job properly. Shoving a load of diplomas in peoples faces wont get you far anymore and probably wont get you a job.
Not that their are any jobs to get.
QUOTE
PhD's are worthless now so why bother trying to get one
It's certainly possible to self-educate to near PhD level (you'll likely be a few months behind, because they know about the papers before they're published) - however, in order to add to our body of knowledge (in a recognizable and accessible way), a PhD might be necessary.
I'm more likely to read a peer reviewed paper than a blog. And I'm more likely to give credence to a peer-reviewed paper than to a blog.
QUOTE
There was a recent PBS expose' on the failings of higher education. It seems that in many universities, as long as you attend a few lectures and turn in some papers with your name on them, you can pass any class (you needn't have learned anything).
I can only speak for my university, and in particular, my department, but this is not the case here. I am an undergraduate at the University of Alberta in physics. Attending lectures need not be important here, what is important are the assignments you turn in, and mainly your scores on exams. I have had many an exam that was difficult enough that the class average was around, or below 50%. At my university your percent grade is unimportant, as everything is marked on a curve at the end. This might seem strange to people not used to it, but it is good in a few ways. It protects students marks from professors who give extremely hard exams, and expect much more from the students than is neccessary for a particular course. It also means if you look at someone's GPA you can tell where they rank as far as students in that year. Someone with a 4.0GPA has the highest marks in there year, so if you are hiring them, you know you are getting the best person from that graduating class. Anyways, when it comes to physics, job search is unimportant as most students go on to graduate school. Graduate school being Masters or PhD students, and besides class work to get one's degree they need to write a thesis on some original research and defend infront of their supervisor, other physics professors, and a few professors from other departments as well. Oh, and before they can defend, they have to pass a Canditacy exam, which, if they fail, they don't even qualify to present a thesis.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| There was a recent PBS expose' on the failings of higher education. It seems that in many universities, as long as you attend a few lectures and turn in some papers with your name on them, you can pass any class (you needn't have learned anything). |
I can only speak for my university, and in particular, my department, but this is not the case here. I am an undergraduate at the University of Alberta in physics. Attending lectures need not be important here, what is important are the assignments you turn in, and mainly your scores on exams. I have had many an exam that was difficult enough that the class average was around, or below 50%. At my university your percent grade is unimportant, as everything is marked on a curve at the end. This might seem strange to people not used to it, but it is good in a few ways. It protects students marks from professors who give extremely hard exams, and expect much more from the students than is neccessary for a particular course. It also means if you look at someone's GPA you can tell where they rank as far as students in that year. Someone with a 4.0GPA has the highest marks in there year, so if you are hiring them, you know you are getting the best person from that graduating class. Anyways, when it comes to physics, job search is unimportant as most students go on to graduate school. Graduate school being Masters or PhD students, and besides class work to get one's degree they need to write a thesis on some original research and defend infront of their supervisor, other physics professors, and a few professors from other departments as well. Oh, and before they can defend, they have to pass a Canditacy exam, which, if they fail, they don't even qualify to present a thesis.
Over thirty years ago I was an undergraduate student at a fairly prestigious [undefined country] University. Many years later I worked as a technician in a less prestigious [undefined country] University. Part of my work involved assisting overseas [from undefined country] PhD students.. I was appalled to find that Phds were awarded to students who, in my humble opinion, would not have been allowed to enter the [undefined country] University as undergraduates and who never even reached this level during their time at the University.
I understand considerable sums of money were involved.
Is this unusual?
I wouldn't doubt that this has happened before, however I would think it is fairly rare. I know this type of thing does not happen at my university (at least not often)
QUOTE
It is why I got the hell out of the education system as fast as I could. You can learn everything you can at university as home without shelling out a fortune or getting in to debt. PhD's are worthless now so why bother trying to get one. If you can do the job well you will go far and people will come to you because you actually can do your job properly. Shoving a load of diplomas in peoples faces wont get you far anymore and probably wont get you a job.
A large number of people who get PhD's stay in academia anyways. But a PhD does mean something still. The fact is, once you get the job, if you can do it well you will move up, but for many jobs you need that piece of paper to even have your resume looked at. It may suck, but thats how it is. A degree will get your foot in the door, and then your actual skills will determine how far you go.
If that undefined country is the united states then no its not unusual. If that undefined country is canada, then yes I would say it is. We dont have no harvards in canada (we got close) but we dont have "get your phd online for 200$ universities" either.
QUOTE
It's certainly possible to self-educate to near PhD level (you'll likely be a few months behind, because they know about the papers before they're published) - however, in order to add to our body of knowledge (in a recognizable and accessible way), a PhD might be necessary.
I'm more likely to read a peer reviewed paper than a blog. And I'm more likely to give credence to a peer-reviewed paper than to a blog.
I'm more likely to read a peer reviewed paper than a blog. And I'm more likely to give credence to a peer-reviewed paper than to a blog.
People like you would have ignored Michael Faraday. But if I presented a professional physicist with a device that proved a theory incorrect after all tests possible I expect he would listen most intently. Providing he/she was not too pig headed to look in the first place. Results tend to impress people and make them most interested in you. Solve a few problems for someone and you CV will not count one jot. But I suppose it depends on what kind of job you are after and how you intend to get it.
I have been offered many jobs but I doubt I could stand working for someone.
If you are good at what you do and it is in demand than you have nothing to worry about.
I always judge what I read on it's content and not on the string of letters after the name.
I suppose it might help if you wish to be a automatically respected because of people like you. My respect has to be earned through seeing what someone can do before I put credence in claims.
I agree that "it's the person that matters", but there has to be a system of wading through the piles of crap and opinions people have. The peer-review process helps.
The fact is that I don't have time to wade through 1000s of pages of anecdotes while looking for some biological information - I need a selecting process.
However, you're right in that anybody can make a discovery. As well, we live in a world where making a discovery on your own is supported (via the patent process).
If I discover something, it becomes open-source (due to the nature of my funding). If you discover something, you're free to make any profits you can.
The fact is that I don't have time to wade through 1000s of pages of anecdotes while looking for some biological information - I need a selecting process.
However, you're right in that anybody can make a discovery. As well, we live in a world where making a discovery on your own is supported (via the patent process).
If I discover something, it becomes open-source (due to the nature of my funding). If you discover something, you're free to make any profits you can.
QUOTE
People like you would have ignored Michael Faraday. But if I presented a professional physicist with a device that proved a theory incorrect after all tests possible I expect he would listen most intently. Providing he/she was not too pig headed to look in the first place. Results tend to impress people and make them most interested in you. Solve a few problems for someone and you CV will not count one jot. But I suppose it depends on what kind of job you are after and how you intend to get it.
What exactly is your point with Michael Faraday? He wasn't formally educated. However he was part of the scientific community. Also remember his career started almost 200 years ago, and science was slightly different then. Using is career as an example for a path to follow now is not going to work.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| People like you would have ignored Michael Faraday. But if I presented a professional physicist with a device that proved a theory incorrect after all tests possible I expect he would listen most intently. Providing he/she was not too pig headed to look in the first place. Results tend to impress people and make them most interested in you. Solve a few problems for someone and you CV will not count one jot. But I suppose it depends on what kind of job you are after and how you intend to get it. |
What exactly is your point with Michael Faraday? He wasn't formally educated. However he was part of the scientific community. Also remember his career started almost 200 years ago, and science was slightly different then. Using is career as an example for a path to follow now is not going to work.
However, you're right in that anybody can make a discovery. As well, we live in a world where making a discovery on your own is supported (via the patent process).
Now adays depending on your field, this is not the case. If we are talking pure science then its tough to discover something in many experimental fields without proper funding connections. Lab equipment costs money, and for example, lots of experimental physics costs a LOT of money! You can get TEM's that cost several millions. UHV STM's that can also cost in the millions. If you want to make a discovery for the semiconductor industry you pretty much have to be working in a Nanofab with formal academic credentials. The infrastructure for the semiconductor industry is amazingly expensive. You might not like the structure of the education system Madkite, but in some cases its neccessary. For something like theoretical physics its not as important, although with the trend theoretical physics is going in I think its unlikely that one scientist will be responsible for a scientific revolution like Einstein was 100 years ago. Strides being made in String Theory are made by a huge community of physicists and mathematicians, and its slow going. Science is getting expensive and the structure of everything is more and more becoming a neccessary evil.
Maybe in general. However, I have a heard of at least one Ph.D. who got his doctorate merely by examining the literature and coming up with a novel method of putting the data together - i.e., giving a new theory.
So, you don't always need the massive labs (but I sure like 'em)
So, you don't always need the massive labs (but I sure like 'em)
QUOTE
Maybe in general. However, I have a heard of at least one Ph.D. who got his doctorate merely by examining the literature and coming up with a novel method of putting the data together - i.e., giving a new theory.
So, you don't always need the massive labs (but I sure like 'em)
So, you don't always need the massive labs (but I sure like 'em)
Yeah, but in physics (dunno what subject he is in) he would be called a Theorist, not an experimentalist. There are very few areas of experimental physics that doesn't take a lot of experensive equipment....although I have seen some cool experiments that use sand or other viscous fluids and all they require is an expensive camera to film it, and a computer to analyze it. Not like experimental subatomic physics.......that costs billions haha. And besides, massive labs are very fun! What science nerd doesn't like expensive toys? Come on now
It was biology.
Isn't String Theory entirely mathematical? I cannot even think of any experiments that can be done with regards to String Theory.
Isn't String Theory entirely mathematical? I cannot even think of any experiments that can be done with regards to String Theory.
QUOTE
Isn't String Theory entirely mathematical? I cannot even think of any experiments that can be done with regards to String Theory.
Yeah, String theory would at best be called Theoretical physics, or as I would rather say, its mathematics with the hopes of being applied mathematics with the dreams of being physics. Still valuable, but I don't think its neccessarily physics. The analogy I have heard for being able to test string theory is that you would need a particle accelerator the size of the solar system to get to the energy levels where String theory would make any unique predictions (unique meaning that the same predictions could not also be made with Quantum Mechanics)
"The education system is currently designed to keep the very intelligent from gaining too much knowledge, whilst keeping the semi-intelligent in too much power. This is because people need to be kept stupid, to stop them realising how stupid they've been!"
QUOTE
The analogy I have heard for being able to test string theory is that you would need a particle accelerator the size of the solar system to get to the energy levels where String theory would make any unique predictions
Hmmmn, that's a heck of a budget requirement. Though it might be worth it eventually. I wonder how long I'll have to wait before an institution can afford such a project?
QUOTE (El_Machinae+Mar 10 2006, 09:58 AM)
Hmmmn, that's a heck of a budget requirement. Though it might be worth it eventually. I wonder how long I'll have to wait before an institution can afford such a project?
Hey, they just announced the billionaires list, it could happen!!! But how many would part with all their $$$???
Hey, they just announced the billionaires list, it could happen!!! But how many would part with all their $$$???
Overtime, the relative cost of projects goes down, because of increasing wealth. With productivity increases, population increases, and technological increases - it's bound that some day this will be affordable.
Just something to keep in mind - we almost live in a world where people can own a space plane and a laptop computer that's more powerful than ever seen before. It should happen if we take intelligent steps to get there.
Just something to keep in mind - we almost live in a world where people can own a space plane and a laptop computer that's more powerful than ever seen before. It should happen if we take intelligent steps to get there.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.