3 ms·
> what they want you to work on, what papers they want you to write, the classes they want you to take etc This isn't my experience. A PhD is supposed to be y
by chrisseaton 4y ago
> what they want you to work on, what papers they want you to write, the classes they want you to take etc
This isn't my experience.
A PhD is supposed to be your own research, not your advisor's.
- bunbunbun 4y agoYeah, it is supposed to be that in theory. But in practice, I had to be trained through multiple research positions doing work for other people, none of whom had managerial experience or training. It was very chaotic and I rarely had time to work on my own research until dissertation.
- Fomite 4y agoA PhD should be, at least in theory. Whether it is or not is a question - and "until dissertation" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Importantly, a staff scientist position will never be. If you cannot tie your project to one of my grants, you are losing me money. For a student, that might be acceptable. For a staff scientist, it's not.
- bunbunbun 4y agoThat’s the way it works and will probably always work. Profit, prestige, and power are the driving factors, even for the most equity-minded individuals.
- adamsmith143 4y agoAnecdotes aren't very useful but in my department it was pretty clear that most of your work was going to be derivative of your advisors at least tangentially if not directly. Also I think the article and most of the discussion so far has been around experiences in the US' PhD system so I'm not sure experience in the UK is equivalent.